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.

 

Did the USAF Help pull off 911?

page: 14
16
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



1.- Which are the six hidden panic alerts on B757/67 aircraft that weren´t used on 9/11?
2.- How does the software on those same type airplanes over ride pilot error?


May I jump in here too???

I would also like to know the "six hidden panic alerts" in the Boeing 757/767 cockpits. Because, in all my hours and years flying them, somehow I missed this lesson???

Oh, and...I am really, really keen to learn about the "software" that prevents pilots from making erors, on the Boeing 757/767. Wow, I cannot believe I missed all of that!!!!!




posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



You mean besides correct your English? Hmmm....lemme think.


That is the best you can do is “attack my grammar” says a lot about you doesn’t it.



How about check NOTAMs?? Check weather? File a flight plan? Preflight??


You are not a combat pilot and you did fail the test, that is a fact.


Really? So I guess the opinions and experiences of a pilot that has been in combat doesn't matter to the pilotsfor911truth.org, huh? I guess if you ever have to have surgery, you're not going to ask if the doc has had any experience?


The Funny thing is “no pilot” on pilotsfor911truth.org supports your views or your ridiculous beliefs concerning 911. If I am wrong then prove it?



Yeah, like "bushstole04" or whatever the heck it's called.


The fact is it been proven it was a “stolen election,” just goes to show how ignorant you really are.



Really? Wow, they are different? I never knew that.
Flight manuals for a 757, 767, etc, aren't available, huh? No way they could have gotten one and familiarized themselves with the systems months before taking control of the aircraft, right??


Do you have proof of this? Or are you just giving your opinion as usual?



Basic aircraft flight controls haven't changed in years, dude. Your "common knowledge" is lacking. Try again.


Your ignorance is noted.
I don’t go around pretending to be a wanna be pilot.



Keep avoiding and deflecting. Keep it up. It's really funny.


I am not avoiding and deflecting I just asked for the same common courtesy of Rush969 to start answering his questions.

My post to Rush969 has nothing to do with you so stay out of it, this is between Rush969 and I.

Rush969 has no problems carrying his own weight in this thread and having a conversation with me, I don’t think he needs a lackey to pick up his slack do you?


Now, quick, dig thru this thread and find some question that I didn't answer and DEMAND that I answer it before you dole out your pearls of wisdom for all to see.


Are we getting all emotional here?



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
That is the best you can do is “attack my grammar” says a lot about you doesn’t it.


Not my problem.


Originally posted by impressme
You are not a combat pilot and you did fail the test, that is a fact.


A fact, huh? Care to prove that lame statement?


Oh, really, Iceman?
That's the answer I figured you'd give. You don't have Clue One about combat flying, and you're proving it now. You can't answer the question yourself, so now you post some BS statement playing CYA.

I have over 2K worth of flying hours, about 600 hours combat and over 100 combat missions. And you? Never mind; I know the answer to that.


Originally posted by impressme
The Funny thing is “no pilot” on pilotsfor911truth.org supports your views or your ridiculous beliefs concerning 911. If I am wrong then prove it?


Prove what? That they are spouting off about military combat flying and you don't seem to think it's important that they have the testimony from a pilot that has actually flown in combat?


Originally posted by impressme
The fact is it been proven it was a “stolen election,” just goes to show how ignorant you really are.


Yeah, whatever.


Originally posted by impressme
Do you have proof of this? Or are you just giving your opinion as usual?


Shucks, Craftsman. Suddenly someone elses opinion is lacking, yet if it supported your cause, it would be the gospel? Lame.

Here you go. Think it would have been difficult for anyone to get one of these:

www.amazon.com...

Since I know you never checked out what a Dash 1 is, I'll give the answer to you. A Dash 1 is the basic manual for operating an aircraft. Tells you pretty much how to fly the plane if you have a common understanding of the aircraft. This is the manual that USAF uses to teach pilots out of flight school how to fly the specific aircraft they will be assigned to (fighter, transport, helicopter, etc).

As I said, and you obviously have failed to grasp, basic flight controls haven't changed in years. Yoke, throttles, rudder pedals, control surfaces. They all operate the same in any aircraft.


Originally posted by impressme
My post to Rush969 has nothing to do with you so stay out of it, this is between Rush969 and I.


Last I checked, this is a public forum.


Originally posted by impressme
Rush969 has no problems carrying his own weight in this thread and having a conversation with me, I don’t think he needs a lackey to pick up his slack do you?


Lackey, huh?
Yeah, keep up the namecalling, Craftsman.


Originally posted by impressme
Are we getting all emotional here?


Not in the least bit. I find it funny that you are buckling when someone is asking basic questions of you. You are not "impressing me" at all.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



quote]Originally posted by impressme
The Funny thing is “no pilot” on pilotsfor911truth.org supports your views or your ridiculous beliefs concerning 911. If I am wrong then prove it?

Prove what? That they are spouting off about military combat flying and you don't seem to think it's important that they have the testimony from a pilot that has actually flown in combat?


You totally ignore my question I will say it again NO pilots on (pilotsfor911truth.org) support your ridiculous theories.


Originally posted by impressme
Do you have proof of this? Or are you just giving your opinion as usual?

Shucks, Craftsman. Suddenly someone elses opinion is lacking, yet if it supported your cause, it would be the gospel? Lame.


I have no problem with anyone stating an opinion but please don’t think your opinions are the facts unless you can prove it.


Originally posted by impressme
My post to Rush969 has nothing to do with you so stay out of it, this is between Rush969 and I.
Last I checked, this is a public forum.


Last time I check T&C it is against their rules to “gang” up on any poster period.


Originally posted by impressme
Are we getting all emotional here?

Not in the least bit. I find it funny that you are buckling when someone is asking basic questions of you. You are not "impressing me" at all.



I am not here to impress you, perhaps if you didn’t try so hard pretending being something that your not, then you wouldn’t be in here defending a lie now would you.






[edit on 29-11-2009 by impressme]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
You totally ignore my question I will say it again NO pilots on (pilotsfor911truth.org) support your ridiculous theories.


So, you're speaking for this website, huh? Didn't know that. And I'm not too worried if they "don't support my ridculous theories". I'm certain plenty of people don't support theirs, either. And remember, they are theories, not facts.


Originally posted by impressme
I have no problem with anyone stating an opinion but please don’t think your opinions are the facts unless you can prove it.


You mean like your websites? Remember, they are just theories. And a theory is nothing more than an opinion.


Originally posted by impressme
Last time I check T&C it is against their rules to “gang” up on any poster period.


Last time I checked, you've been asked questions by several people and you still haven't answered them. Avoid and deflect. Weedwacker just asked the same questions and you still haven't answered them. How come???


Originally posted by impressme
I am not here to impress you, perhaps if you didn’t try so hard pretending being something that your not, then you wouldn’t be in here defending a lie now would you.


I'm not. I know what I am. I've been flying with the USAF since 1996. You don't want to believe me, fine. I'm pretty certain that I could come up with 781s, flight orders, awards, the whole ball of wax and you'd still whine that I was lying.

Squawk all you want about "proof" and whatnot; or try to discredit my posts. Doesn't do anything except show everyone how desperate you are to make everything fit your ideas of the truth.



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 08:18 PM
link   
If the 767 does not have panic buttons, then Impressme is totally discredited, is that it folks? I don't think so. This situation should be considered in the context in which it has occurred.

The plane does not have panic buttons, ok?

Impressme started a thread by asking a couple of questions, and so far they haven't been answered.

Instead the guy has been ridiculed and insulted, and now you have him over a barrel with these panic buttons.

Why would anyone want to admit a mistake when people are poised to celebrate it? It does not appear to be a search for truth about 9-11, it appears to me to be bullying.

I think Impressme made a simple, honest, mistake. Big deal. I'd say it's understandable if he got bogus info and posted it prior to checking it out.

Especially in light of the ridicule and insults that are all through this thread.

Why don't you answer his questions?

[edit on 29-11-2009 by Aircow]



posted on Nov, 29 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 



You totally ignore my question I will say it again NO pilots on (pilotsfor911truth.org) support your ridiculous theories.

So, you're speaking for this website, huh? Didn't know that. And I'm not too worried if they "don't support my ridculous theories". I'm certain plenty of people don't support theirs, either. And remember, they are theories, not facts.


Sorry, but most of mine are proven facts.


Originally posted by impressme
I have no problem with anyone stating an opinion but please don’t think your opinions are the facts unless you can prove it

You mean like your websites? Remember, they are just theories. And a theory is nothing more than an opinion. .


You are really desperate no my website provide proven facts unlike your gov.org that only tells a fairytale with no supporting facts to verify anything.


Last time I check T&C it is against their rules to “gang” up on any poster period.

Last time I checked, you've been asked questions by several people and you still haven't answered them. Avoid and deflect. Weedwacker just asked the same questions and you still haven't answered them. How come???


Because, I put that Troll on ignore months ago. I don’t believe in feeding the Trolls and if you continue with your attacks I will put you on ignore.

The question was not asked by you and I don’t have to answer to you, and again Rush is quiet capable of handling his own and doesn’t need a die-hard OS lackey to back him up, does he. I will also stress this again, ganging up on a poster is against ATS T&C rules.


Originally posted by impressme
I am not here to impress you, perhaps if you didn’t try so hard pretending being something that your not, then you wouldn’t be in here defending a lie now would you.

I'm not. I know what I am. I've been flying with the USAF since 1996. You don't want to believe me, fine. I'm pretty certain that I could come up with 781s, flight orders, awards, the whole ball of wax and you'd still whine that I was lying.


Your right, I can make copies of awards all day long to enforce my story.
You are not a pilot period.



Squawk all you want about "proof" and whatnot; or try to discredit my posts. Doesn't do anything except show everyone how desperate you are to make everything fit your ideas of the truth.


Looks like the pot calling kettle to me.



[edit on 29-11-2009 by impressme]



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
I think its hilarious that this thread is still going...
Some folks just do not learn.

Impressme, I think I know your problem. You need to STOP listening to Pilots4truth, they are a bunch of showboats. They had like one real ATPL Pilot over there, from Pan Am, an airline that has been defunct since 1991! Most of the supposed Pilots in P4T are nothing more then Commercial Rated Pilots. You can get your Commercial Rating as soon as you get your VFR Single Engine rating, its nowhere near the level of an ATPL rating ( last time I checked it was like $8K for VFR, like another $2-4K for commercial, someone with an ATPL is in for like $250-500K). No one with Civilian Ratings has any access to, or is an expert on, Commercial Airline Equipment unless they work for an airline in some capacity (mechanic, ramp, PSA, etc.) Its quite telling that no currant pilots, or other aviation experts, seem to belong to P4T, its all retirees, ex-military, and civilian rated people.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 
Why don’t you tell them that to “Pilots for 911 Truth .org” Do you have anything to add to this thread besides you, insulting my intelligent with your rhetoric?

I asked a question in my OP why don’t you try and answer it because no one has, instead people like you have tried in every feasible way to discredit me. Perhaps that is why this thread is still going.

Answer the question.


Question: how many of you believe the OS is true and what “conclusive scientific evidences” that has convince you that the OS is true, and please post sources and links to back your claim.

In this debate Please lets leave out “opinions as your facts” If you have an opinion then please state it “as your opinion”. Lets be respectful to one another, lets keep this civil please.
Thank you.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 



You need to go back and re-read your own thread. I already explained this to you in the first few pages before you insulted me, and told me to stop talking to you. I guess it stinks when your pet theory get submarined though, don't it?

BTW I have said the same stuff about the P4T plenty of times on here in the past, not just in your thread. You can go to the list of pilots, and confirm that many of them are posers with nothing more then a VFR/Commercial rating, trying to pretend that they are actually working for a commercial airlines (which requires an ATLP). I have no desire to go over there and feed their egos by giving those trolls any attention on their board where they can delete my posts that make them look bad. I honestly have to wonder how many of them suffer from Münchhausen syndrome (the need for constant attention).

Personally this thread looks like it nothing more then an attempt on your part to advertise for the P4T site by upsetting members of this site who are military. How many links have you posted to the P4T site in this thread? Enough times to violate the T&C about advertising and cross-posting to another site? You trying to scrape up some hits for the P4T site by using ATS as free advertising? They getting a little attention starved over there?



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

Question: how many of you believe the OS is true and what “conclusive scientific evidences” that has convince you that the OS is true, and please post sources and links to back your claim.


Oh sorry, I thought that the thread was whether or not the Military pulled off 911, but I see that was just the inflammatory title not the real question.

Do I think that the OS has inaccuracies? Sure, there are too many variables for any summation of that day to be 100%. Many of those inaccuracies were do to the “fog of war” on that day. People panicking, too much happening too fast to take it in, even a few nuts using it as a chance for the 15 seconds fame, etc. However, their version of the story fits much more exactly then that of any of the Truther Speculation which is based almost exclusively on “fog of war” type of events. So, for example, people reporting in bombs and such, because in reality there are going to be secondary explosions when an aircraft hits a structure full of gas lines, and other combustible materials. Especially people who may not have been at a vantage point to see exactly what happened, but only felt the effects of the event.

Soooo... To sum up, I see no discrepancy that four aircraft were taken over, and flown into structures just as the OS claims. I see no proof that the Military was involved in any negative way, and even if the military had been immediately been contacted by the Civilian FAA they did not have time to do anything about it. You had imperfect people dealing with a unheard of situation in a very short period of time with imperfect information received by a lot of panicking civilians on the ground who may not have had a clue of the bigger picture and were spreading rumors. That is where your holes in the OS come from, and that is the area where the truth movement thrives.



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Personally this thread looks like it nothing more then an attempt on your part to advertise for the P4T site by upsetting members of this site who are military. How many links have you posted to the P4T site in this thread? Enough times to violate the T&C about advertising and cross-posting to another site? You trying to scrape up some hits for the P4T site by using ATS as free advertising? They getting a little attention starved over there?


Looks to me that you trying to appeal to me on an emotional level don’t you think.
Do you have anything to add to this thread besides your assumption and negative opinions of untrue accusation?



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 



Soooo... To sum up, I see no discrepancy that four aircraft were taken over, and flown into structures just as the OS claims. I see no proof that the Military was involved in any negative way, and even if the military had been immediately been contacted by the Civilian FAA they did not have time to do anything about it. You had imperfect people dealing with a unheard of situation in a very short period of time with imperfect information received by a lot of panicking civilians on the ground who may not have had a clue of the bigger picture and were spreading rumors. That is where your holes in the OS come from, and that is the area where the truth movement thrives.


Thank you for your opinion, however when one does not open his mind, one cannot find truth. I read about your opinions every day on all these 911 threads by the same negative debunkers who very seldom contribute anything to the 911 forums to begin with. These opinions that you have stated mostly are conjured up from gov.org web sites and from reading to much disinformation and a refusal to researched any other alternate theories, which clearly demonstrates tunnel vision.

I have to laugh at your opinion and what lame excuses you have conjured up by protecting our government and military of any wrongdoing, yet you have not presented any credible facts to support your claims, but have no problem at ridiculing me. Your ridiculous excuses for why our commercial airliners where not intercepted is you claim they did not have enough time .
You call an hour not enough time. Not enough time wow. Why is it when all other aircraft strays off their flight courses before 911 and after 911 our military had intercepted everyone of them in just minutes except on 911 and a recent flight about a month ago which we still do not have all the answers to. How much time would our military need to dispatch a jet to intercept an aircraft?



posted on Nov, 30 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   
OK impressme.

Look, we have gone around the same thing for quite some time now and it appears we can´t reach an agreement, nor will either of us convince the other that he is wrong.
So, let´s say we can agree to disagree, OK?
However, I would like to return to the other aspect of our discussion that you have avoided and that now has more people interested also.
You made a couple of claims previously.
1.- One about there being “six hidden panic alerts on B767/57 planes”.
2.- And the other about “software on those same type planes that is able to avoid pilot error”.
I have already given you my answer to claim number 2 and invited you to refute it.
But you haven´t said a thing. You are obviously avoiding the matter.
I would ask you once again to please explain to us number one, and refute number 2.
(I say us, because as I said before, we have more people interested in this now.)




posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by rush969
 



2.- And the other about “software on those same type planes that is able to avoid pilot error”.




In my search for the best evidence of fake 911 terror I have found a great deal. As far as stand alone evidence, the capability of the BOEING 757 and BOEING 767 to take off and land by computer alone is the most compelling. These planes are fully capable of being remotely piloted which is what happened during the terror attacks. Each of the four hijacked planes had 6 hidden panic alerts for just such events that were known to the flight crew. NONE OF THEM WERE ACTIVATED!! The alleged terrorists were the equivalent of Lee Harvey Oswalds --- patsies lured into place to take the blame. Our FBI has made no effort to reconcile their initial list of terrorists with the real people with those identities shown to be alive in the Middle East!!


www.911falseflag.com...



An anti-hijacking apparatus for aircraft and airports including combinations of the following elements: panic/silent alarms hidden on the aircraft, brake locks on the aircraft which can be controlled remotely, tire deflating devices which can be controlled remotely, a fuel line shut-off valve which can be controlled remotely, a fortified cockpit door, bullet proof backs to cockpit seats, a flight system remote control which protects high rise buildings from aircraft collisions, smoke generators, gas dispensers, and other methods of obscuring vision in the passenger cabin, and stun devices and tranquilizer darts.


www.freepatentsonline.com...

I find this rather odd that this was the only quote I used and forgot to post a source for this, and it was an honest mistake. Does this answer your question #2?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


The anti-hijacking device patent was filed over a year AFTER 9/11 happened, and it was listed in 2007. The aircraft used were built in the 1980s, and to this date there is zero evidence that ANY plane built has them.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 02:33 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


If this is the sort of place you go for your info :-

www.911falseflag.com...

no wonder you are all over the place.

Have you got any remotely credible source for Boeing 757 and 767's being capable of being flown remotely and the multiple panic buttons ?



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 02:52 AM
link   
So, it is! Wow,I will repeat this the last time I made a mistake and I have admitted to it. For the casual readers on this forum I hope you will accept my apology for not following up on my information and I was not trying to deceive anyone.

Ok, lets get back to the main topic:


Here is two questions: how many of you think that handful of corrupt military pilots using remote controled airplanes, loyal to Dick Cheney and a handful of corrupt officials in the Bush administration planed and carried out 911 also using demolitions expert in our military to blow up the WTC and covered it up by using the FBI to hide and lie about all the evidences.

Question: how many of you believe the OS is true and what “conclusive scientific evidences” that has convince you that the OS is true, and please post sources and links to back your claim.

In this debate Please lets leave out “opinions as your facts” If you have an opinion then please state it “as your opinion”. Lets be respectful to one another, lets keep this civil please.
Thank you.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 02:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 



If this is the sort of place you go for your info :-

www.911falseflag.com...

no wonder you are all over the place.

Have you got any remotely credible source for Boeing 757 and 767's being capable of being flown remotely and the multiple panic buttons ?



God forbid if anyone makes a mistake what more do you want?

How low are you guys willing to go, you got me, now let it go.



posted on Dec, 1 2009 @ 03:02 AM
link   
Its worth keeping in mind, that the more people involved: Government, NSA, USAF, demolitions experts, WTC security and so..... someone may go whistleblowing - I guess with all the conspiracies going around,there will be around 10.000 people involved in 911 by now.

Dont you guys think that some of theese would speak out loud, if it was the case ?




top topics



 
16
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join