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.

 

Another seriously undeniable flaw in the 'official' 9/11 story.

page: 4
132
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   
reply to post by TopsyTurvyFuture
 


I think you have cut the ground from beneath your feet by stating some things in connection with exercises on 9/11 which are false and by exaggerating others.

About the only thing which I find I can agree with you is that there was confusion at NORAD on the morning of 9/11. Not entirely surprising in that NORAD had been conditioned for years to look outwards from the continental US and suddenly became aware of mayhem in it's rear.

Anyway, to go back to the NRO exercise which you evidently feel is important, here is a link providing details of the imagined scenario :-

www.scribd.com...

You will see that it was indeed envisaged that the plane to crash into the NRO was a light aircraft of a Lear type. So we are still a million miles from your original allegation that the scenario was " very nearly the same as the actual event ".

I note that you cannot substantiate that this exercise was " being monitored by NORAD ". I didn't expect that you would. Why would NORAD monitor an imaginary exercise which didn't involve any real planes ?

As the exercise was imaginary, and was called off, how could it have had any impact on the events of 9/11 ?




posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:23 PM
link   
"The author is clearly in denyal."
"Simply put.- DENYAL."
"Denyal is a normal defense mechanism. But takes away our objectivity."

Great job of discrediting Mr. Lawson. Although my guess is he knows how to spell the word "denial" properly.




[edit on 19-4-2010 by SphinxMontreal]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:29 PM
link   
"About the only thing which I find I can agree with you is that there was confusion at NORAD on the morning of 9/11."

Trillions of dollars poured into NORAD to defend the country and the best they could come up with was "confusion"? Wow!

"Not entirely surprising in that NORAD had been conditioned for years to look outwards from the continental US and suddenly became aware of mayhem in it's rear."

On the contrary, very surprising considering a well funded and profesionally stocked organization like NORAD had their lunch handed to them by 19 cavemen who couldn't even keep a Cessna in the air.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
"About the only thing which I find I can agree with you is that there was confusion at NORAD on the morning of 9/11."

Trillions of dollars poured into NORAD to defend the country and the best they could come up with was "confusion"? Wow!

"Not entirely surprising in that NORAD had been conditioned for years to look outwards from the continental US and suddenly became aware of mayhem in it's rear."

On the contrary, very surprising considering a well funded and profesionally stocked organization like NORAD had their lunch handed to them by 19 cavemen who couldn't even keep a Cessna in the air.


A totally fallacious argument. Vast sums are spent on law enforcement. Does that ensure that a crazed gunman could never enter your house and murder your family ?



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1


A totally fallacious argument. Vast sums are spent on law enforcement. Does that ensure that a crazed gunman could never enter your house and murder your family ?

Is that one next? Do you know something we don't. Juarez seems to be training just such a force, and they seem to be coming over our increasingly porous border in Texas along with Mexican military and helicopters. Looks like we're in for another false flag. What does the North America Union flag look like anyway?

Not only did they not identify the four planes, but didn't we just see another thread that showed that two of the flights never took off from their respective airports.

[edit on 19-4-2010 by m khan]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


I stand corrected, thanks to my personal spell check police.
Thank you SM. (The spelling has been corrected.)
You do get the point however, right??

So, it is DENIAL.
Quite obvious in Mr. Lawson, as in so many others.

But it´s only natural, and very human indeed.




[edit on 19-4-2010 by rush969]

[edit on 19-4-2010 by rush969]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by boroboy
reply to post by TopsyTurvyFuture
 


Hello
I am not sure if you know but when the bombs were exploded on the London underground on July 7th ,there was an "exercise going on that day aswell"same type of scenario .

Hmmmm 2 attacks / 2 training exercises both exercises with the same scenario as what happened


Except the scenarios were not the same. The London exercise was a partial overlap but it was a paper exercise involving 5 or 6 people in a room. No involvement of emergency services or police.

Please explain how it had any practical impact on 7/7.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


It was not just NORAD but also the FAA. Look into the timeline and how long it took to

1. Identify a hijacking
2. Discuss options - suddenly it was not one incident but multiples suspected. There are also flights that were grounded that it is believed were not able to finish their mission which was on the west coast.
3. Finally called NORAD - ANY plane that is hijacked should immediately be reported by the FAA but it was not that day and the government had nothing to do with it.

This post is simply another 'link to the truth' that should be broken into smaller posts. What is the flaw? It should only be one according to the rules of this forum. I know I have had threads closed that were too vague so why not this one?

The OP should pick one flaw instead of doing what 3000 others have done on this site and just stand by a link.

Now, as far as this statement,



Anyone with an IQ above 10 would look at the WTC 7 video with the top of the building creasing and the speed of the collapse and say "That looks exactly like a demolition".


Yes, it LOOKS like a demolition but anyone with common sense and a little internet investigation could see that it is not a demolition and could not have been based on the prep work needed that was not done. IQ has not nothing to do with how smart you are but how you process information, how well you learn and engage in critical thought. Did you ever test for MENSA or are you not qualified? If you did, I think you would see that IQ is more than knowing how to add 2 + 2. Try a few teasers...

www.mensa.org...


Also, cavemen did not attack us on 9/11. Read a book and look into who funded and spearheaded the operation. It starts with the assassination of Anwar Sadat....

[edit on 19-4-2010 by esdad71]

[edit on 19-4-2010 by esdad71]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


when people have been coerced or threatened to keep their mouth shut...they usually do. and when key people try and speak up, and they mysteriously turn up dead, that tends to focus the mind of others who are privy of contentous information.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by dariousg
 



However, when a plane crashes, intentional or not, the NTSB is still called in to the accident scene to do their JOB.


Just thought I would point out some of the contradcitions there. The NTSB's job, among other things, is to regulate and monitor the transportation industry. To that end they will investigate accidents and mishaps. 9/11 was not an accident nor a mishap. There was no purpose in "investigating" the crashes as there would be nothing to learn or advise for future correction. The crashes were all purposeful acts of criminals. They may have assisted techinically, as required, the governing investigative agency but that is not their "job".


The NTSB are transport experts, they should have been first responders, and if they were not they were negligent. Penetration of the cockpit is an obvious reason, logistics of the flight patterns another, crash characteristics of a modern jet plane flying into a skyscraper, and a fortified building. Preservation of the crash scene, and any recoverable wreckage, including flight data recorders. Interviewing eyewitnesses and analysing any conflicts in their stories, analysing any recoverable metals, plastics, spaceframes, wiring. In fact if I was a NTSB man, (which I'm not..I'm just a forum member that CIA doesn't give a toss about
) if an FBI or CIA came to me and said piss off, I'd smash him in the Fissog, tell him to get out of the way 'till I do my job.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
i have met some people and been to places you have never heard of i can tell you this when the CIA or the F.B.I tell you it is top secret they mean that if you open your mouth you will never be heard from again that i can promise you



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by killer4281
i have met some people and been to places you have never heard of i can tell you this when the CIA or the F.B.I tell you it is top secret they mean that if you open your mouth you will never be heard from again that i can promise you


omg cheerio killer 4281 !




Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 19/4/2010 by Sauron]



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by -Blackout-
I ran upon this website and these theories/facts within this link below. Its some interesting stuff.

www.salem-news.com...

Thoughts?



[edit on 19-4-2010 by -Blackout-]


How is this another seriously undeniable flaw, this is exactly the same
bull plop that has been peddling now for 9 years.

It's just moved to different web site.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by killer4281
i have met some people and been to places you have never heard of i can tell you this when the CIA or the F.B.I tell you it is top secret they mean that if you open your mouth you will never be heard from again that i can promise you


I take it you don't work for the NTSB then.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 

oh, hooper, i'm a pilot...cover-up, baby!!



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al

Originally posted by -Blackout-
I ran upon this website and these theories/facts within this link below. Its some interesting stuff.

www.salem-news.com...

Thoughts?



[edit on 19-4-2010 by -Blackout-]


How is this another seriously undeniable flaw, this is exactly the same
bull plop that has been peddling now for 9 years.

It's just moved to different web site.





Too right. After 8.5 years it has got to the stage where all that is put up is re-gurgitated drivel. Much like being on an endless flight and inhaling the same old air over and over and over !



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

There is nothing unique or miraculous about flimsy documents surviving horrendous air crashes.

But it is a miracle that our country has survived some 47 years into a Nazi coup, and people are still sleeping.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 08:02 PM
link   
At least one poster claims that parts from the alleged flights were positively identified by some government agencies.

Looking over the links provided, I do not see this evidence.

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

this is just unsubstantiated and possibly intentionally misleading garbage.


Unless this evidence is presented, that is exactly what this is.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


Odd, the previous post said the NTSB did not investigate.



posted on Apr, 19 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by FewWorldOrder
At least one poster claims that parts from the alleged flights were positively identified by some government agencies.

Looking over the links provided, I do not see this evidence.

Originally posted by 4nsicphd

this is just unsubstantiated and possibly intentionally misleading garbage.


Unless this evidence is presented, that is exactly what this is.


Right, so 4 flights took off on the morning of 9/11 and never landed.

There were 4 airplane crashes that morning but some people apparently have a job marrying the two events together.



new topics

top topics



 
132
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join