It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


FAA Memo: Feds Knew Flyover Would Cause NYC Panic

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 04:08 PM
Just thought I'd share my latest article. . . .

Arrogance in America

Let me start off by stating how arrogant we, the American people, are. We want to have freedom of speech. Imagine that We want to say what ever we want, whenever we want. We want to criticize anyone when ever we want. When we see something (or someONE) stupid, we want the ability to SAY that this is (or they are) stupid.

Have you no shame? The next thing you greedy, arrogant people will want is the right to bear arms

We want our health care. But we want it to work for us when we want it. I personally pay quite a bit for mine, but being arrogant, I think that it should work for me when I want it, whenever I want it. I want it to take care of my family. And I don’t think that the government should have any say in it.

I know. Terrible, greedy rich white guy (I made over 50K last year so I know Obama is out to get me)

I use air conditioning. I use a gas-powered lawn mower. Sometimes I leave lights on in my house. I don’t drive an expensive hybrid. And what makes it all so bad is that I’m not using a single mercury-filled dangerous new green light bulb. (Where are the police, I give up ) I am so arrogant that I use power that I pay for, to make me and my family more comfortable.

Are you ready to make me walk the plank yet?

Want to know something worse? I am so arrogant, that I don’t think we should use water boarding to get information from murderous terrorists. I think we should use sledgehammers, blow torches, paper-cuts and lemon juice, or even worse make them read Nancy Pelosi’s book. I want these terrorists punished for what they did and I want them HURT if they don’t tell us about more attacks Fell sorry for them? They didn’t HAVE to kill innocent men and women and children. They CHOSE to do that. When they CHOSE that course of action then they have lost any and all rights as a human being. (ACLU, kiss my butt )

I can’t believe how arrogant I am. In addition to being arrogant, I’m also (apparently) un-patriotic. I don’t want to pay more taxes. I rooted for the tea-party folks (but being arrogant and greedy and white) I chose to work instead, so I guess that makes me (according to NBC) greedy, unpatriotic, arrogant, racist, AND a redneck.

Can I request a room with a view in Gitmo? Please, someone, LOCK ME UP for wanting just the basics for my family, that I work for. For wanting the basic freedoms that come with being an American who follows the Constitution. For wanting to spend my money how I want to spend it, not some faceless, mindless, spineless bureaucrat.

I guess that’s what makes me arrogant.
Now keep this in mind, Obama wanted a picture of the Statue of Liberty, so he had Air Force One fly so low along the New York skyline that he caused mass panic, traffic snarls, and terrified people that had lived through that terrible event of 9/11.

For a picture.

And we are the ones who are arrogant.

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 04:39 PM
The flyover was a simple reminder to the people of NY that those responsible for the elimination of WTC are now in COMPLETE control of this government and they will do as they please. Rubbing it IN YOUR FACE.
Air Force One. Repeatedly passing by the spot that the towers USED to be an unmistakeable reminder of American economic dominance.They dont need to steal planes now.It was a photo op alright.

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 05:23 PM
reply to post by mikerussellus

I`d go easy there Mike , your coming across a little bit like a domestic terrorist .......

........................ they might want to see what you know , what your planning , they might have a good hunch or some real reliable Intel, from that neighbour you don`t get along with much.

sledgehammers, blow torches, paper-cuts and lemon juice, .....

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 05:23 PM
reply to post by daddio

Very interesting indeed. This is definitely a clue that needs to be taken into consideration. Another piece to the puzzle.

Why would they use an unmanned military jet? I bet when we find that answer we "crack the case".

[edit on 29-4-2009 by nunya13]

[edit on 29-4-2009 by nunya13]

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 05:32 PM
Here's a picture of a drone jet with the tail painted orange:

An excerpt from the accompanying article (emphasis added):

Non-essential equipment such as the F-4E’s 20mm cannon is replaced with ballast, while unused avionics like radar are left aboard but disabled. Finally, the wingtips and tail are painted orange to distinguish the aircraft as a drone.


I'm trying to find a pic that shows the craft following Air Force One having an orange tail...

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 06:20 PM
reply to post by mikerussellus

I agree with so much of this. I especially love forcing terrorists to read nancy pelosi's book to get them to talk. Or watch one of her speeches and count the blinks. It stimulates me to think outside the box for things that couldn't possibly be called torture, that many people choose to do: wax their legs and and face to remove the hair for example. no end of books or tv shows to select from, that watching would drive them mad. I know: require them to go through the parental portion of the financial aid application on the FAFSA website before they get to eat dinner.

okay, back to the topic. We have the right to be treated with respect by the White House. Would the white house torture prisoners with a flyover with a gigantic plane only 1000 feet above the ground? I think not. We, citizens of the USA, deserve at least as much respect as prisoners. Some of us really arrogant types feel we deserve even more.

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 08:32 PM
At some point NY'ers are going to want to defend themselves against low-flying aircraft doing possible terror-runs on the city. Can we count on the federal government to protect us - can we trust them not to pull another 9/11? Does that mean a thousand people run out in the streets and paint the cockpit with laser pointers? Home-made rockets launched in a desperate attempt to knock it down? Old vets manning AA batteries on the rooftops?

I'm sure if they wanted to do a dry run - say, on the Goldman Sachs building, which the pilot seemed particularly keen on buzzing, they could have used a simulator, but maybe they were attempting to access the readiness of the civil defense forces. From what we've seen, the civilian component is completely vulnerable.

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 08:51 PM
reply to post by nunya13

nun, you do know what a 'drone' is, right?

That pic you linked is an F-4. It is not 'unmanned' any more than the F-16s are 'unmanned'!!

So, your premise is wrong, regarding a 'drone' following the VC-25A on that day.

[edit on 4/29/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 11:09 PM
SO, they were all around Goldman Sachs a whole lot?
Is that true?
Is that any surprise?

posted on Apr, 29 2009 @ 11:19 PM
Why is every thread in the Breaking News forum and in a bunch of other threads on this site descending into the same mindless hysteria? Seriously read how many posts on the first page say something to the effect of "We're all pawns being moved around", the hysteria and fear on these boards are absolutely ridiculous. Yes it was short sighted and stupid that Air Force One flew over New York causing a panic, but for the love of a christ people this is just a # up from the new administration, not the beginning of some epic NWO plan.

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 12:00 AM

SO, they were all around Goldman Sachs a whole lot?

Yes, they made three passes past the building. One of the videos posted here shows the GS building in the foreground of the plane. I have two friends working there, and they tell me a pretty wild story - they could look straight out the window and see the jet banking right towards their building, one friend thought the plane was just going to fly by, but then banked sharply and came right at the building before continuing its turn to fly back out to the harbor. Everyone was literally ****ing themselves.

The photo-op stunt was brainless enough, but what was up with the pilot? That was sheer recklessness on his or her part. You can't tell me they weren't deliberately trying to scare people.

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:04 AM
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

this whole stunt seems to have dropped out of the news cycle, obscured by swine flu and spector changing parties. and the president promises it won't happen again. we are supposed to be satisfied with that but I would like to hear a lot more about what people on the scene observed. None of the news reports mentioned the Goldman Sachs building.

I wasn't buying into the "sending a message" theory but this throws a different light on the matter. Please, anyone who observed this or heard from observers, tell us more of what happened!

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:10 AM
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

It's been mentioned, somewhere before. The pilots that are allowed to fly these airplanes are active duty, no less than full bird colonels.

Absolutely, 100% I agree....this should have been publicized before hand, and, my opinion, could have been handled far, far better by the people involved.

Some wish to blame the President...OK, in the chain of command, he's ultimately responsible. Doesn't mean that he, personally, knew beforehand. No leader can anticipate EVERY action of those he/she oversees. it's called 'delegation'....

Regardless....the USAF pilots followed their would they know whether the populace were informed?? I'd imagine they assumed it. Again, hindsight.

This photo 'op' would have been a non-issue IF it had been conducted on the weekend, and IF there had been an attempt to publicize it. But, then, there would have been thousands of people, all taking pictures, crowding the streets...and hoping that THEIR picture was sold other words, mayhem. At least, I think this was the "logic" behind the decision to not makeit public beforehand. TOTAL mis-calculation, hind-sight!!!

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:13 AM
[Not sure if I am doing this right.
But has anyone figured the numerology in this? Happened on 4/27/2009
equals 4-9-11
for nine eleven?

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:40 AM
reply to post by itsonlyme

You meant to write...."For 9 11"

'for' and 'four' are homonyms. Fun with numbers, eh??? Well, this can be taken to many, many different levels.

BUT, this particular 'numerology' BS only works if you use the English language.

Try again, in Spanish. See if you get the same results.

or, even better...use Arabic!!! Makes more sense!!! But, be sure to use the proper dialect!!!

Oh, come on!!! This is so silly, not sure why it's even getting 'legs'...oh...guess it's MY fault!! HeHe!!

OR, use the UK and EU version of how to write dates....use 27/04/09.

Or, use 27.4.2009

Or...well, use any combination. Sorry for your USA-centric bias. Too bad, so sad.

HINT...I am born and raised in the USA. But, I happen to have knowledge of other lands, mystical fabulous lands that are rumoured to exist beyond our borders....ooooohhhh! so exotic!!!


Thanks for your post!!

[edit on 4/30/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:43 AM
reply to post by weedwhacker

all that aside, I've never seen a plane this size fly at 1,000 feet off the ground and buzz the downtown buildings. Have you ever heard of any plane this big flying that low over a city and circling a landmark, banking around buildings? It just sounds very very odd. I think that full bird colonel must have been pretty stunned to receive this order. Not ever having been in the military, I don't know if it's possible to question or seek to validate an order that will cause such disruption. Wouldn't anybody involved in this have been able to see that it was completely inappropriate? This wasn't a war maneuver, wasn't a rescue, wasn't even transporting the president anywhere. The official description is that it started out to be two training missions that were combined into a photo shoot. Have you heard what these two training missions originally consisted of? I'm not sure publicizing it ahead would have done that much good. Seeing a gigantic plane coming at your office window would give you a fright long before you remembered the announcement about the flyover.

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:58 AM
Well it could be a set up by Obama's enemies in order to create a negative perception related to him by the supoused obama order to take an op photo.

Then all this crazy theory about massive holograms could fit in somekind of test to measure the reaction of the masses. Because as stated by some witnesses there are some people that didnt seen any jet behind the tail of the 747. Others said that they saw the same plane followed by a pair of F16s near montreal ???

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:59 AM
reply to post by earlywatcher are very correct. I concur with your assertions, that it induced panic.

What I have seen, on the threads, is an 'ulterier motive' aspect being theorized, which is just pure paranoia talking.

The 'stunt' was insensitive, I agree. The pilots involved may have 'assumed' (I know, I know) that the populace had been adequately briefed beforehand.

In fact, I would not put it past a proper USAF Colonel to question an order, IF he felt that the ctizens were in danger, in any way. I'd bet he, (they, because there are at least four pilots involved here) are really pissed off.

In hindsight. I know, I would be...if sent on a 'mission', then learned I was lied to, after the fact. duty Military cannot speak up. You WILL NOT hear from them, since they are under Orders. THAT is the way it is.....

For whatever 'whacked' reason, someone decided to not make the flyover public. THIS was the stupid decision, and this is wher the focus should lie.

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 11:01 AM

Originally posted by earlywatcher
reply to post by Blackmarketeer

this whole stunt seems to have dropped out of the news cycle, obscured by swine flu and spector changing parties. and the president promises it won't happen again. we are supposed to be satisfied with that but I would like to hear a lot more about what people on the scene observed. None of the news reports mentioned the Goldman Sachs building.

I wasn't buying into the "sending a message" theory but this throws a different light on the matter. Please, anyone who observed this or heard from observers, tell us more of what happened!

I can give you more information about the Goldman Sachs building. It is on the NJ side of the Hudson River. It is the tallest building in NJ and is right on the water front. I believe it is about 65 stories tall but I am not exactly sure. I will go out at lunch time at snap a picture of it.

Take a look at this video:

It was taken at the base of the Goldman Sachs building. The building is directly behind the person taking the video. The plane is moving directly at the building from the water moving away from the Statue of Liberty. It looked like it was going to fly right into it until the pilot banked left to avoid it. This happend 2 or 3 times. If we are to believe the official story then there would be no reason for the plane to come anywhere near this building. There is plenty of space over the Hudson river to turn around the plane to make multiple passes by the Statue of Liberty without having to buzz the largest building in the state. This was done on purpose in my opinion. Not sure why though, maybe to gauge how much the public still fears a terrorist attack.

posted on Apr, 30 2009 @ 01:34 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

I sure would like to be a fly on the wall when those four pilots met for a beer to talk over that day's work (or whatever AF1 pilots are allowed to drink, not sure bout the beer.) I have enormous respect for the military. While I'm sure there are some bums and crooks in the mix I think most are ethical, disciplined and completely up to the task of defending this country. I admire the fact that they will not speak up while on active duty. (What I mean is, I know some retired officers who have a LOT to say opinion wise.) But somewhere up that chain of command it switches from military to political appt. We need to know how this mission came about at that level. What was the political thinking here.

I'm not convinced the president takes the military all that seriously. Whether he "knew" of the mission or not (and I believe he did), you have the equivalent of the most expensive, technologically enabled flying vehicle in the country doing the equivalent of donuts on the football field. Unless it was something worse. Unless something was accomplished that wasn't an official part of the mission. Not part of the orders given to those pilots. Something that occurred as an effect of the mission.

If you think someone is after you but they aren't, it's called paranoia. If someone is indeed after you it's not paranoia. Until we can tease out the real reason this happened, I don't think the questions constitute paranoia.

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in