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: 17
16
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2009 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

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.


Well. It´s been five days now since you asked your "questions" again....ZZZZ.....ZZZZ
All is quiet, isn´t it?? It appears you are the only one who believes this.
And again:
You never answered MY QUESTIONS.
Nor have you admited YOU LIED. AS I said.
You claimed there were hidden panic alerts on B757/67 aircraft, and that these same type aircraft have sofware that over rides pilot error.

I said you lied, and me and others responded to this claims.
However, you haven´t admited to this lies.
I would apreciate it if you could admit that you made a mistake.
Maybe you could give us the source you used on this, so that everybody knows that source is no good.
Thanks.





posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 12:40 AM
link   

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.

Still waiting for the OS defenders to answer my questions? Out of 16 pages, not one of them can answer my question, I wonder why? They claim the OS is one hundred percent true, yet they can’t give us any real evidences to support their fairytales.

Here is another questions for you OS believers, is it possible for our government to pull off a false flag operation? If not, state why? This question is safe to use an opinion for an answer.



Still nothing but ridicule, when are some of you going to answer these question?
You all have done a wonderful job of voiding, deflecting the OP questions people are not interested in your insults and ridicule, you now have lost all your creditability.

Some of you who been on ATS for a long time defending the OS lie cannot explain to the ATS casual reader why you even believe in the OS nonsense . It is obvious some in here have other motives than trying to look at different ideas, and perhaps different theories to discover the truth. 16 pages yet not one single OS defender cannot answer the questions, I love it!


I am still waiting. To the casual readers, looks to me my theory might be right after all, because all I am getting is they same old trolls who want to discredit me and not discuss my topic.

Not one single OS believer can truthfully show any evidences that the OS is all true and why they believe in it. Instead some just want to play their disinfo game and accuse me of being a lair but, will not “demonstrate” to what or how I have lied to them?

I have always wondered if a small loyal group of corrupt military pilots could have flown those airplanes into the WTC with remote control technology. Perhaps those Boeing 757 & 767 were really from our military base. Maybe that will truthfully explain why the FBI would not turn over the crash debris, known full well those parts will not match up to the correct serial numbers.

Why cover-up the crash debris change out parts they all have serial numbers on them that would be proof enough to prove they came the crashed planes.
The only reason to cover up the plane wreckage is, they are not the real planes that the FBI claimed they where. Where is the proof?

I can’t think of any other reason can anyone else?



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 06:46 PM
link   
HELLOOOOOO!!!!
ANYBODY OUT THERE???............ZZZZ.......ZZZZ
I´M RIGHT, AM I???.........ZZZZ.......ZZZZ
YES I AM, YES.........ZZZZ.......ZZZZ
I AM SO SMART YES.......
I HAVE DISCOVERED THE CONSPIRACY, HAVEN´T I???
...............ZZZZ.......ZZZZ
I DIDN´T LIE, DID I?? NO, DID I??
HELLOOOOOO!!!!



Who listens to these OS supporters?? Nobody!! They claim to be pilots, they claim to know about planes. They know nothing. They are on Cheneys payrol for sure, YES, OF COURSE. EUREKA!!!
.......ZZZZ.........ZZZZ



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
I have always wondered if a small loyal group of corrupt military pilots could have flown those airplanes into the WTC with remote control technology.


Nah, pilots have big mouths; someone would have talked by now.


Originally posted by impressme
Perhaps those Boeing 757 & 767 were really from our military base.


That's something that would have drawn major attention. Civilian aircraft on military ramps aren't common.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
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.

Still waiting for the OS defenders to answer my questions? Out of 16 pages, not one of them can answer my question, I wonder why? They claim the OS is one hundred percent true, yet they can’t give us any real evidences to support their fairytales.

Here is another questions for you OS believers, is it possible for our government to pull off a false flag operation? If not, state why? This question is safe to use an opinion for an answer.



Still nothing but ridicule, when are some of you going to answer these question?
You all have done a wonderful job of voiding, deflecting the OP questions people are not interested in your insults and ridicule, you now have lost all your creditability.

Some of you who been on ATS for a long time defending the OS lie cannot explain to the ATS casual reader why you even believe in the OS nonsense . It is obvious some in here have other motives than trying to look at different ideas, and perhaps different theories to discover the truth. 16 pages yet not one single OS defender cannot answer the questions, I love it!


Still no one will answer any of the OP questions, instead we have children in here playing games.


[edit on 11-12-2009 by impressme]



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


I thought you had me on "ignore"?

You posed two new questions, I gave you my opinion *gasp*.



posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 08:11 PM
link   

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.

Still waiting for the OS defenders to answer my questions? Out of 16 pages, not one of them can answer my question, I wonder why? They claim the OS is one hundred percent true, yet they can’t give us any real evidences to support their fairytales.

Here is another questions for you OS believers, is it possible for our government to pull off a false flag operation? If not, state why? This question is safe to use an opinion for an answer.


Anyone? I guess the OS believers are really in denial because, none of them are willing to answer to why they believe in a story that has no credibility or any proof that can substantiate the validity of the real evidences.

Not one of them can show any creditable proof that their nonsense is true however, notices how much time they have spend ridiculing me. LOL

Come on people? Is it possible for a hand full of corrupt military pilots to fly these airplanes into the WTC with remote control technology?



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Pretty much have stopped posting on this thread because the original post is too moronic for words. Tried to be nice and dissuade you, and it didnt work so now, the honest feeling about the post.



posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Pretty much have stopped posting on this thread because the original post is too moronic for words. Tried to be nice and dissuade you, and it didnt work so now, the honest feeling about the post.


No instead, you resorted into making up lies about me and flat out refuse to apologies.
You call yourself a debunker yet in your desperate attempts to discredit me you had to make up lies about me.
Now you come in here claiming you just stop posting. LOL well here you are and you are still posting.

I thought Id heard all the excuses for debunkers, or OS believers for not answering some basic, easy question. So now my OP is to “moronic.”

Tried to be nice”, that is a joke coming from you Swampfox46.





[edit on 12-12-2009 by impressme]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 





“Tried to be nice”, that is a joke coming from you Swampfox46.


That was being nice.



You call yourself a debunker yet in your desperate attempts to discredit me you had to make up lies about me.


Not entirely sure what your point is here, but I'll go with it. Its people like YOU that have labeled me a debunker. And again, you are the one that thinks that the Air Force and the Army have conspired to commit crimes against the United States, not me (and for your warped sense of the events, it would take far more than a handful of rogue members).

I'll end this now so you can post once again asking for an apology and so you can once more make your ridiculous request for "scientific evidences" to prove your belief in this nefarious plot.

[edit on 13-12-2009 by Swampfox46_1999]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


And finally, my first post on this thread...




Keep this civil? You flat out accuse my fellow Airmen of being involved in something like this? Without a single, solitary shred of proof other than the lunatic ravings of the truth movement?

I truly do wish I knew who you are in real life. Slander and libel are civil offenses for which you can be held liable.


And the next post you made....




Fist of all, I am an American citizen born and raised here and I love my country and I support our military men and women. Now that is out of the way lets get back on topic, I did NOT in NO way accuse the “whole military of being involved into pulling off this false flag operation and furthmore, I DO NOT believe the whole military was involved as I stated in my OP:


YOU, sir, are the one that introduced the concept of the "whole" military.

YOU are the one that used quotes, trying to signify that I had said that, when it is clear that I did not.

SO, if someone is going to apologize for lying, it should be YOU.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I've responded to your post in the "Dealing with 9/11 Madness" thread, as I think it's getting somewhat off the topic of this thread, but I've recently dealt with this same type of issue in the aforementioned thread. Here is my response:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 13-12-2009 by scott3x]



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



YOU, sir, are the one that introduced the concept of the "whole" military.


YOU sir should stop telling lies. I never have claimed the entire military was involved nor have I ever thought it or wrote it.

YOU sir are so desperate to cover your lies that you have now invented new lies to try and cover your old pathetic lies. Shame on you!



YOU are the one that used quotes, trying to signify that I had said that, when it is clear that I did not.


YOU did stop lying.


Thanks for nothing for derailing my thread and running off any casual readers “JOB WELL DONE”!



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


If they came from an AF base they would have had to meet up with the 4 planes in flight and replace them. All four planes were tracked on radar from take-off to impact with no mystery planes. And there is no way they were military. The USAF is the only service to operate the 757, and they only bought 4. NO US military operators of the 767 exist.
If they were flown by remote control then they had to be extensively modified, and that takes time. They are not Fly By Wire, so servos to operate the controls have to be installed. So why didn`t the airlines notice them missing? If they weren`t belonging to an airline then where did they come from?



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



If they came from an AF base they would have had to meet up with the 4 planes in flight and replace them.


Perhaps, but don’t you and everyone else relies that we will never know because, the FAA destroyed their air traffic tapes of the whole event on 911. I think they knew those planes where not AA or United airliners. The question we should be asking is why did the FAA destroy critical evidences? Looks like they are defiantly covering up something.


And there is no way they were military.


Your only assuming that.


The USAF is the only service to operate the 757, and they only bought 4.


Bought four? Come on, our military has been flying Boeing aircraft since they were invented, besides the Air force has planes all over the world.


NO US military operators of the 767 exist.


That is your opinion only.


If they were flown by remote control then they had to be extensively modified, and that takes time.


Yes they had as many years to modified these planes who said it was done in a short time. Besides, we don’t know how many years this false flag was in the making.


So why didn`t the airlines notice them missing?


They didn’t, because in my opinion their planes were not used and again that might help explain why the FAA destroyed their tapes.


If they weren`t belonging to an airline then where did they come from?


My guess, the military the Air Force.



posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


So WHAT if the USAF bought Boeing aircraft for decades and has planes all over the world. The C-32, which is their designation for the 757 is ONLY based at Andrews AFB. It is operated by the Special Air Missions unit, which is the unit that flies Air Force One and other VIPs around.
It is NOT just my opinion that the US military doesn`t operate the 767. They have never bought a single 767, and no matter how hard you look you will never find a picture of one.If you look at the Boeing serial number lists, that list EVERY 757/767 ever built, you will only find 4 757s and you won`t find a single 767 on the list.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



So WHAT if the USAF bought Boeing aircraft for decades and has planes all over the world. The C-32, which is their designation for the 757 is ONLY based at Andrews AFB. It is operated by the Special Air Missions unit, which is the unit that flies Air Force One and other VIPs around.
It is NOT just my opinion that the US military doesn`t operate the 767. They have never bought a single 767, and no matter how hard you look you will never find a picture of one.If you look at the Boeing serial number lists, that list EVERY 757/767 ever built, you will only find 4 757s and you won`t find a single 767 on the list.


I hate to tell you but, you are wrong.





KC-767 Tanker Transport Aircraft, USA

The Boeing 767 tanker transport aircraft, designated KC-767 for the US Air Force, is a high-performance version of the Boeing 767-200ER twin-aisle jetliner equipped for fully integrated tanker operations. It is fitted with either boom and receptacle refuelling, hose and drogue refuelling or both.
The commercial 767 first entered service in 1982 and more than 880 aircraft have been delivered. The cabin of the tanker can be configured for passenger transport, as a freighter, convertible (passenger or freighter) or Combi (passenger and freighter).

www.airforce-technology.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 
Uh, I hate to tell you this, but you aren`t as smart as you think you are with that link. Yes the KC-767 was OFFERED to the USAF, and contracts were signed to lease 100 of them. Until the person that signed the contract and her son went to work for Boeing as executives. The contract was revoked, and the aircraft never entered service. The ONLY operators of KC-767s are Italy and Japan, and both bought less than 10. If the USAF has KC-767s, then why are they about to accept bids for new tankers? One of which is the KC-767, the other based on the A330 from Airbus.

[edit on 12/14/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by impressme
 
Uh, I hate to tell you this, but you aren`t as smart as you think you are with that link. Yes the KC-767 was OFFERED to the USAF, and contracts were signed to lease 100 of them. Until the person that signed the contract and her son went to work for Boeing as executives. The contract was revoked, and the aircraft never entered service. The ONLY operators of KC-767s are Italy and Japan, and both bought less than 10. If the USAF has KC-767s, then why are they about to accept bids for new tankers? One of which is the KC-767, the other based on the A330 from Airbus.

[edit on 12/14/2009 by Zaphod58]


Where is the source for your “opinions” I will provide you with some real hard core facts. On the other hand, are you one of those people who can “never be wrong,” or cannot admit when they have made a mistake? I will not hold it against you, we all make mistakes.

Military
Versions of the 767 serve prominently in a number of military applications. Most military 767s are derived from the 767-200ER.
[edit] Airborne Surveillance Testbed
The Airborne Optical Adjunct (AOA) was built from the prototype 767-200. The aircraft was later renamed the Airborne Surveillance Testbed (AST). Modifications to the aircraft included a large "cupola" or hump which ran along the top of the aircraft from above the cockpit to just behind the trailing edge of the wings. Inside the cupola was a suite of infrared seekers that were used to track theater ballistic missile launches in a series of tests.[47] The aircraft remained in storage at the Victorville Airport in California for a number of years before being scrapped in July 2007.
[edit] E-767
Main article: Boeing E-767


Boeing E-767 AWACS aircraft.
The E-767 AWACS platform is used by the Japan Self-Defense Forces; it is essentially the E-3 Sentry mission package on a 767-200ER platform. Japan operates four E-767s.
[edit] KC-767
Main article: Boeing KC-767
The KC-767 was developed from the -200ER for the USAF to replace some of its oldest KC-135E tankers. Boeing's tanker was selected and later designated KC-767A.[48] However the Pentagon suspended the contract due to a conflict of interest scandal and later cancelled it.


Boeing KC-767 tanker
The KC-767 Tanker Transport, a 767-200ER-based aerial refueling platform has been ordered by the Italian Aeronautica Militare and the Japan Self-Defense Forces, which have designated it KC-767J. For the USAF KC-X Tanker competition, Boeing offered the KC-767 Advanced Tanker, which was based on the in-development 767-200LRF (Long Range Freighter), rather than the -200ER.[49][50]
[edit] E-10
Main article: E-10 MC2A
The E-10 MC2A was to be a 767-400ER-based replacement for the Boeing 707-based E-3 Sentry AWACS, the E-8 Joint STARS aircraft, and EC-135 ELINT aircraft. This included an all-new system, with a powerful Active Electronically Scanned Array and was not based on the Japanese E-767 AWACS aircraft. One 767-400ER aircraft was produced as a testbed for systems integration. But the program was canceled and the prototype was sold to Bahrain as a VIP transport in January 2009.[51]


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 
You certainly put me in my place. Oh wait. There are a few flaws with that wiki article. Major ones for you. The AOA was operated by Boeing for the Army, and was never a military aircraft. I was involved in quick turning that aircraft several times. The E-767 was bought by Japan, not the US. They bought 4. I helped service them too on the way to Japan (they stopped at Hickam). The E-10 was cut down to one testbed/proof of concept that got as far as the airframe without sensors, being built before it was canned. The airframe was never turned over to the military. As for admitting when I`m wrong, I`m the first to admit when I am, but I got offered the FSME for the aviation section for a reason. I have spent most of my life dealing with and studying aviation. I spent 25 years on Air Force flightlines, and have dealt with the C-32`s and two of the 767 types in service you mentioned. So

[edit on 12/14/2009 by Zaphod58]



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join