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.

 

Continental Crash 3407 - A Conspiracy? - 9/11 Widow - met w/ Obama Dead onboard

page: 13
38
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
"I care not who sits on the throne of England. He who controls the money supply of England controls the throne, and I control the money supply," -Amschel Bower de Rothschild, in 1911.




posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
aware of the following?
www.legalnewsline.com...



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Perhaps it was not Beverly they were after...Alison Des forges, geonocide expert, was also on the plane....
news.bbc.co.uk...

"The court trying alleged perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide has expressed its shock at the death in an air crash of a top expert on the 1994 massacres."



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
For those of you saying, "OMG it's definitely a conspiracy because the pilot didn't radio for help":

Buffalo plane crash was 'instantaneous,' investigator says

'It was a sudden catastrophic event that took place and then 30 seconds later it impacted,' an NTSB investigator says. Recovery efforts are slowed as water that doused the wreckage turns to ice.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 07:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by calcoastseeker
So do you all "loons" get the same amount of time each night to get on the computer and the internet and post this stupid crap.

A plane flying into BUFFALO NEW YORK (yes,where it is colder than heck and has bad winter weather) crashed while trying to land.

The flight was delayed for two hours before leaving Newark because of the weather!

Every sane person in the world knew that the weather on the east coast was bad.

Icing was an issue and the air traffic controllers were asking pilots if they were experiencing it.

It was a weather related aircraft accident Nothing more nothing less.

NOBODY WANTS TO THINK THE WORST.......BUT C'MON IF IT WERE FRANKFURT,ROME,HONG KONG,BRISBANE THEN YES WE WOULD LOOK AT THE ALTERNATE POSSIBILITY.........
BUT KNOW THIS IS BUFFALO NJ USA, AND FROM PAST SITUATIONS AND EVENTS ITS OPEN TO ALLSORTS OF THEORIES......HENCE A CONSPIRACY SO ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE

YOU MENTION THIS ICEY WEATHER THATS BULLS*IT AND U KNOW IT.......
THESE PILOTS,GROUND STAFF, AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL KNOW WHEN IF A SITUATION TO TAKE OFF,FLY OR EVEN LAND IS SAFE............
AND THEY MAKE IT SAFE ESPECIALLY IN EUROPE N ELSE WHERE WHO EXPERIENCE COLD N ICEY WEATHER.....PILOTS ARE TRAINED FOR THIS SORT OF THING...........SO THE WEATHER SITUATION UR REFERING TO I DONT BELIEVE 4 ONE MINUTE THAT WAS THE REASON.........



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by surrealist1978
AND THEY MAKE IT SAFE ESPECIALLY IN EUROPE N ELSE WHERE WHO EXPERIENCE COLD N ICEY WEATHER.....PILOTS ARE TRAINED FOR THIS SORT OF THING...........SO THE WEATHER SITUATION UR REFERING TO I DONT BELIEVE 4 ONE MINUTE THAT WAS THE REASON.........


As someone who lives here, I will tell you you have NO IDEA how fast our weather turns in the winter or how severe it becomes. After you've spent a few decades dealing with Lake Effect Weather, perhaps then you might change your opinion. Look into it you might understand better what pilots flying into and out of our airports have to deal with.

TheWelder



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
For those of you saying, "OMG it's definitely a conspiracy because the pilot didn't radio for help":

Buffalo plane crash was 'instantaneous,' investigator says

'It was a sudden catastrophic event that took place and then 30 seconds later it impacted,' an NTSB investigator says. Recovery efforts are slowed as water that doused the wreckage turns to ice.



Nice red herring. This is not a conspiracy because the pilot didn't radio for help.

I'll tell you why this is a conspiracy.

1. It is a conspiracy because according to this article by the telegraph in the U.K. there have just been 10 fatal plane crashes in the U.S. in the last 13 years and only 4 inc this one since 9/11. So out of Hundreds of thousand planes that fly in all sorts of weather in all sorts of situations in the last 13 years only 10 have had fatalities.
10 Fatal crashes in 13 years

2. Despite such infrequent Fatal crashes on this plane just so happened to be a 9/11 victims advocate named BEVERLY ECKERT who lost her husband on 9/11. So out of hundreds of thousands of flights over last 7 years since then there have just been 4 crashes including this one and ECKERT just happened to be in one that crashes? AND just a week after meeting with Obama. Gimme a break

We can talk about ice on the wings and pilot error and fog until the cows come home but the chances of this poor woman Eckert having this much bad luck involving air tragedy once on 9/11 and then to die in a plane herself after meeting the friggin President for crying out loud are so small she would probably have a better chance at being struck by lightening.

Cost Benefit Analisys: The black ops took out a thorn in their side in Eckert while at the same time offer a tragedy to eat up the news cycle at the time the horrendous stimulus bill is passed. At the same time the G7 is meeting and all we will see on the news is this plane crash. 50 casualties is nothing to the NWO they control the news so they get away with it and they also don't have the scrutiny of suiciding Eckert which would have looked far more suspicious. Game set Match. Well I'm not buying it.

Huffingtom post report on Eckert
BTW i know her husband died on the 98th floor of the world trade center but he was essentially hit by a plane.

To add to the issue the plane was de-iced and it was only a year old so continue burying your heads in the sand and ignore the probablity that all these factors are irrelevant

That is why this is suspicious. Eckert either has the worst luck on the planet or there is something more to this.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 08:42 PM
link   
Great point. Debris would be scattered. And this is a fairly residential populated area. Witnesses would have seen or heard a missile strike. Plus there would have been an explosion in the sky which there has been no evidence of such. We need a whole lot more than what you got here to go with any such conspiracy.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo


She was also about to take them to court ...to find out all the answers to many peoples questions. I think that is quite a threat to TPTB dont you?

www.commondreams.org...

Not really just a widow who wanted a memorial stone built now is it?



About to take them to court?

Read again...it's dated 2003!

Then read what I posted on page 11:


How are you holding up?
If I knew that [after] three years we would still be waiting for intelligence reform, I don't know if I would have signed up. My life feels like that movie Groundhog Day; I'm constantly getting out of a cab in front of the Rayburn House Office Building, trying to get something done.


From here:
www.usnews.com...
Written in 2004
Seems like she was getting tired of it all, actually
What sounds more plausible is government bureaucracy wearing her down.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Beefcake
 


Jeez, thanks for the great response. Of course, you missed the part where I clearly stated that I was only talking to those who felt it may be a conspiracy due to the pilot not radioing for help.

So you basically straw man'd my "red herring". Well played, sir.

And by the way, that is far from any proof of a conspiracy.



[edit on 2/14/2009 by Irish M1ck]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


Well, I think if the auto pilot was engaged during most of the flight while there was a slow buildup of ice on the wings. The auto pilot will compensate for the extra force, pull, pitch an yaw of the aircraft. Thus keeping the plane nice and level for the entire flight. But when disengaged on the final approach the controls went very heavy in an instant, and the pilot could not make the necessary corrections at that low of an altitude which resulted in the fatal crash. You would need to be a very fast person to make over a dozen corrections in less than 30 seconds to a little less than a minute to get the aircraft level again.

Auto pilot systems can be very unforgiving sometimes in bad weather when disengaged. I think this is what may have happened. It stands to reason because of the weather. Not to mention he was at or near 1500 feet.
There would be no time to radio anybody, I believe this is why I heard no horn alarms in the tower recording ,but the flight computer will call out the altitude. Thats where I get lost. Unless the pilot was talking to the tower just before he disengaged the auto pilot on approach at 1500 feet. I think this is the way it happened. That’s why there’s no declaration for an emergency. There was not time to call after the auto pilot was disengaged and the controls went heavy. The only way you could tell is from the insterment flight recorded, and the cabin voice recorder. Tower tapes won’t tell you this. But I’m sure this is how it went down

sorry for the edits’. I just has to think this though from past flying experiences in the military.








[edit on 15-2-2009 by SJE98]

[edit on 15-2-2009 by SJE98]

[edit on 15-2-2009 by SJE98]

[edit on 15-2-2009 by SJE98]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Getting so tired of it that she met with Obama 3 days before the crash. Really sounds like she was giving up the fight doesnt it?



[edit on 15-2-2009 by sueloujo]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by sueloujo
 


Where's the banging head against a brick wall icon??

Again I refer you to my post on page 11, I'm getting tired of repeating myself.


This photo provided by the White House, taken Friday, Feb. 6, 2009, shows President Barack Obama shaking hands with Beverly Eckert in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus in Washington during a meeting with a group who lost family members in the 9/11 and the USS Cole tragedies.


And

Last week, she met with President Obama about the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Fetchet said in a statement.


Clearly you aren't going to see common sense, which is fine but at least get your facts straight.

For example she wasn't there 3 day before the crash it was 6.

She also wasn't the only 9/11 widow who saw Obama that day.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by Chadwickus]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by sueloujo
 


Where's the banging head against a brick wall icon??

Again I refer you to my post on page 11, I'm getting tired of repeating myself.


This photo provided by the White House, taken Friday, Feb. 6, 2009, shows President Barack Obama shaking hands with Beverly Eckert in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House campus in Washington during a meeting with a group who lost family members in the 9/11 and the USS Cole tragedies.


And

Last week, she met with President Obama about the closing of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Fetchet said in a statement.


Clearly you aren't going to see common sense, which is fine but at least get your facts straight.

For example she wasn't there 3 day before the crash it was 6.

She also wasn't the only 9/11 widow who saw Obama that day.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by Chadwickus]


Why do you continually try to downgrade this woman who has spent much of her life since her husband died trying to get to the truth. "she was only a widow trying to get a memorial set up". She was a a lot more than that.

I apologise I was 3 days out when she met Obama but the point remains the same...she had not given up nor got fed up with it. She had not been bashed down by the authorities and was continuing her efforts by meeting with a new president in the hope of "change".
She was not letting the court case rest....do you know how long these things take?
Now you can go bash your head...



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
Very interesting information out this morning:

link: www.nytimes.com...


Icing, which the crew of the plane reported shortly before the crash, is one possible reason, but Steven Chealander, the safety board member assigned to the investigation and a retired airline captain, said the aircraft had a sophisticated ice protection system.

The plane was equipped, he said, with pneumatic boots, which are a bit like tires, on the front edges of the wings, the tail and the vertical stabilizer, that inflate and contract twice a minute to break ice accumulations, as well as electrically heated propellers. The system gives an indication in the cockpit if any boot is not working, and so far, investigators have found no sign of such an indication, Mr. Chealander said.

“This Dash 8 is a workhorse airplane,” he said. “It’s not really susceptible to ice.”



The commuter plane that crashed near Buffalo on Thursday night slammed to the ground flat on its belly, with almost no forward momentum and facing opposite its intended route, seconds after two automatic warnings to the pilots that the plane was not moving fast enough to stay aloft, the National Transportation Safety Board said on Saturday.









[edit on 15-2-2009 by questioningall]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by sueloujo

Why do you continually try to downgrade this woman who has spent much of her life since her husband died trying to get to the truth. "she was only a widow trying to get a memorial set up". She was a a lot more than that.

I apologise I was 3 days out when she met Obama but the point remains the same...she had not given up nor got fed up with it. She had not been bashed down by the authorities and was continuing her efforts by meeting with a new president in the hope of "change".
She was not letting the court case rest....do you know how long these things take?
Now you can go bash your head...




Not downgrading, just pointing out she is not the sole advocate of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee, merely a member.

The reason I'm stressing this point is because for a good 10 pages of this thread, most were of the belief that she was the sole advocate and some sort of thorn in the side of the government.

I'm attempting to show she didn't seem to be a threat, I even attempted to show that there are other members of 9/11 Family Steering Committee who are equally 'threatening' and asked why they weren't targeted.

As for the meeting with Obama, all I can find about what they talked about was this:


Last week, Eckert visited the White House when President Obama met with relatives of those killed in the 9/11 attacks and the bombing of the USS Cole, to explain the new administration's policies on capturing and prosecuting terrorism suspects, and preventing future attacks.

Speaking at the White House on Friday, Obama praised Eckert as "an inspiration to me and to so many others."

Source

[edit on 15-2-2009 by Chadwickus]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Yet more information out this morning:

link: online.wsj.com...


Cockpit instruments apparently indicated that onboard anti-icing systems were operating normally on a Continental Connection turboprop shortly before it stalled and crashed near Buffalo, N.Y. Thursday night from what now appears to be deadly accumulation of ice on some critical flight surfaces, according to federal investigators.

The latest information released by the National Transportation Safety Board raises questions about the operation and design of the mechanical de-icing systems, or so-called rubber boots, that inflate to shed ice off the leading edges of the wings and some tail surfaces on the widely-used Bombardier Q400 aircraft. Steve Chealander, the safety board member serving as spokesman for the roughly 150 investigators, law enforcement officials and others sifting through the wreckage, told reporters earlier Saturday that the plane had "very sophisticated de-icing systems" that the pilots turned on.


It is looking more and more suspious now....................



Based on information gleaned from the cockpit-voice recorder, according to Mr. Chealander, there was no discussion of any kind before the crash indicating that the systems were not working properly. "We hear no indication thus far" that lights in the cockpit alerted the crew to problems with anti-icing equipment, Mr. Chealander said. Once turned on, the anti-icing systems are designed to cycle automatically until the pilots turn them off.

The findings are important because investigators Saturday described a sequence of events further buttressing preliminary indications the twin-engine turboprop lost its ability to fly due to severe icing.

In his press conference, for example, Mr. Chealander said a "cursory visual look" at the engines indicated they were operating before the impact. Investigators have said that so far they have found no indications of engine or flight-control system malfunctions.



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 


The article you posted continues:


Adding further support to the notion that icing brought down the plane, the safety board said the pilots had been flying using the autopilot during an earlier part of the descent toward the airport, when they noticed significant ice build-up on parts of the cockpit windshield and windshield wipers. The flight-data recorder indicates the plane went out of control almost immediately after the pilots disconnected the autopilot and started extending the wing flaps. In a classic icing accident, such actions suddenly put a plane into a stall.


Which correlates with what I think it was weedewhacker said about the auto pilot would make gradual adjustments as the ice builds up, as soon as the auto pilot is switched off, as the safety board says, the plane went into a stall due to the characteristics of the plane has changed.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by Chadwickus]



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by questioningall
 


The article you posted continues:


Adding further support to the notion that icing brought down the plane, the safety board said the pilots had been flying using the autopilot during an earlier part of the descent toward the airport, when they noticed significant ice build-up on parts of the cockpit windshield and windshield wipers. The flight-data recorder indicates the plane went out of control almost immediately after the pilots disconnected the autopilot and started extending the wing flaps. In a classic icing accident, such actions suddenly put a plane into a stall.


Which correlates with what I think it was weedewhacker said about the auto pilot would make gradual adjustments as the ice builds up, as soon as the auto pilot is switched off, as the safety board says, the plane went into a stall due to the characteristics of the plane has changed.



[edit on 15-2-2009 by Chadwickus]


Very Funny how you are skipping a KEY POINT:


Cockpit instruments apparently indicated that onboard anti-icing systems were operating normally on a Continental Connection turboprop shortly before it stalled and crashed near Buffalo, N.Y. Thursday night from what now appears to be deadly accumulation of ice on some critical flight surfaces, according to federal investigators.

The latest information released by the National Transportation Safety Board raises questions about the operation and design of the mechanical de-icing systems, or so-called rubber boots, that inflate to shed ice off the leading edges of the wings and some tail surfaces on the widely-used Bombardier Q400 aircraft. Steve Chealander, the safety board member serving as spokesman for the roughly 150 investigators, law enforcement officials and others sifting through the wreckage, told reporters earlier Saturday that the plane had "very sophisticated de-icing systems" that the pilots turned on.


So blaming on ice, yet saying it was ALL WORKING NORMALLY??!!!

Something is wrong - they are contridicting themselves................

OOPPSSS - someone will be in trouble over some "truth" being released......... there goes that job!



posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by questioningall
 



Ah no I was continuing the article you started and showing the key part you omitted.

I doubt there is any slip up, statements are usually very carefully written.



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join