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.

 

My beliefs have changed regarding 911

page: 6
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


PONR, you are looking back at that day with "20/20 hindsight goggles" firmly affixed to your face:


Are you saying that if I could hyjack a plane, I would be able to go off course, and fly toward your country's economic centre, or to your country's political centre, for an extendend period of time, and not face any militairy attention?



As someone once put it, you have to go back and put your "September 10, 2001" mindset back in to you head.

The initial critical several minutes, and ATC took quite some time to react, because they (then...remember, 10 September mindset) didn't want to over-react. The procedure is not some "instant trigger" type of situation...they did NOT know what they had, for many minutes.

It slowly began to dawn on everyone, and sink in. Gradually. The transponders disappearing? AND, the pilots' stopped responding to radio calls?

THAT is what ATC saw at first. The airplanes didn't TURN immediately...the autopilots remained engaged, and on course. THEN, no responses on the radio, and THEN a transponder target drops off the 'scope.

NOW...a controller can surmise many things from this, and his FIRST guess might be leaning towards a simple mechanical failure. A total electrical failure, for instance, would cause every 'radio' to fail, except for the #1 VHF transceiver, and the #1 Nav radio (VOR and ILS receiver).

This would be what was faced, at the onset, with American 11 (first to be hijacked).

Furthermore, once the radar target data block, and information that is transmitted by the transponder, was lost, it requires some time to switch his display in order to try to find the "primary" (or, skin-paint) target again.

The ATC radars aren't that accurate, especially when you're talking about ARTCC Enroute, and High Altitude sectors.

Speaking of sectors...there are twenty ARTCCs facilities that cover the 48 States, and EACH is divided up into many sectors, and each sector has its own radio frequency, and is assigned to an individual controller who then bears responsibility for the airspace it encompasses.

TWO airplanes (say, AAL 11 and UAL 175) can be in trail, one behind the other, 20 or thirty miles apart, and be communicating with TWO different controllers, on separate frequencies. (The two flights might even have different routings, depending on how their flight plans were filed...even IF they are going to the same destination). The controllers, themselves, may or MAY NOT be physically seated next to each other. (Usually, not).

The average layperson's comprehension of HOW ATC operates is woefully inadequate, and tends to have an overly simplistic view of a very, very complex system.


I didn't want to mess mikelee's thread up with too much technical detail, but YOU asked, so I answered, and tried to fill in knowledge gaps, with minimal words as possible.


[edit on 10 June 2010 by weedwhacker]




posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
In the real world, hyjacked planes that go off course, and fly towards a couintry's political and economic centres, are intercepted, and shot down if nessecary.


...which is why I pointed out there was in fact a presidential shoot down order, and that the military testified before the 9/11 commission saying they were actively hunting flight 93 and would have shot it down had they located it.

Do I really need to point out that it's your side who keeps making up crap about there being a military stand down order? The real world keeps getting in the way of your conspiracy stories so you people just make up whatever you want that helps to embellish them.


If you believe a country like America would let some Arabs with boxcutters succeed with this by accident, you are naive like a little schoolgirl.


Dude, wake up out of your daydreams and look at what's going on around you...

-Islamic terrorists have hijacked aircraft in the past and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.

-Islamic terrorists are notorious for committing mass murder for the sake of killing one or two targetted people and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.

-Islamic terrorists have committed suicide attacks and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.

-Islamic terrorists have attacked the US in the past I.E. the embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, etcl and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.

-Plus, the Islamic world is so fanatically religious they'll even start mass riots over such frivolous things like cartoons in Danish newspapers and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.

...and here you now are, trying to tell us that there's no way Islamic terrorists could have been responsible in any way, shape or form despite this being their blatant modus operandi for the last forty years. Now that is being as naive as a little school girl. Good grief, there was a bombing attempt in Times Square by a Pakistani trained muslim terrorist not too long ago. What planet are you on, anyway?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 
I get WHAT you are saying.

I also get that you are probably wrong.

What happened on 911 has everything to do with exceptionally poor interdepartmental communications at all levels of government and extremely poor planning for what I believe are not surprising acts by terrorists.

DO you have some proof that the government allowed anything to happen without trying to stop it on 911? Not proof that things happened without being stopped, that the government ALLOWED it to happen?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
the conspiracy theorists behave less like a group of serious researchers and more like a bunch of religious fanatics


i read a lot of what was on the net, and watched most of the videos of what happened on that day, from both sides of the story.

being naturally sceptical, i was sitting on the fence on this issue...

until i read these testimonies.

www.patriotsquestion911.com...

its easy to call people on the net as crazy conspiracy nuts, tinfoilers etc, but the people quoted on that site, and there are thousands, definately have the expertize to say what they do.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by Pan7her]



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by apacheman
Proof, please: links and photos or it's just hearsay that doesn't illuminate anything.

I've yet to hear or see anything that changes the base equation: government complicity in the attacks.


So, you're asking him to prove a negative. Good luck with that.

[edit on 6/10/10 by mothershipzeta]



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:30 AM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Jeah, jeah, whatever, if you think that an hyjacked plane can make it all the way into the Pentagon, the centre of the world's largest militairy power, and into the WTC, the economical centre of the free world, without someone allowing it, you are crazy.

What about the Pentagon own defenses?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 





...which is why I pointed out there was in fact a presidential shoot down order, and that the military testified before the 9/11 commission saying they were actively hunting flight 93 and would have shot it down had they located it. Do I really need to point out that it's your side who keeps making up crap about there being a military stand down order? The real world keeps getting in the way of your conspiracy stories so you people just make up whatever you want that helps to embellish them.


Well, did they stop 911 from happening, like they should've, like logic would predict? No.

I rest my case.




Dude, wake up out of your daydreams and look at what's going on around you... -Islamic terrorists have hijacked aircraft in the past and this is an irrefutable fact, so you if you attempt to deny it, you're lying.


You totally took that out of context, I wasn't debating if Arabs were capable of terrorism, I said that I don't believe that the gov let it happen by accident, that the lack of response was not an accident.

Was it that hard to understand?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Before reviewing the military air defense response on 9/11, it is important to remember objectively what the 'official story' asks the public to believe. According to their narrative, on the morning of September 11, four enormous, fuel-laden, lumbering jumbo jets were hijacked by 19 Arab men with box-cutters and zero in-air flight experience. These slow, unmaneuverable planes were then flown for 1 hour and 45 minutes through the most restricted airspace in the world without eliciting a single military intercept. The most sophisticated military in the world, able to strike dime-sized targets from hundreds of miles away with laser-guided missiles, precision radar equipment, and state of the art aircraft capable of flying well over 1,300 mph, could not locate, engage, nor intercept four wandering jumbo jets. A military that has a budget larger than the combined military assets of every other country in the world could not scramble, intercept and engage any of the radically wayward planes. Even Flight 77, which was allowed to fly unimpeded and crash into the Pentagon one full hour after two jets had been flown into the Twin Towers in NYC, failed to elicit the response and intercept from any military jets. Nor, indeed, did flight 93. A plane that crashed in a Pennsylvania field 1 hour and 45 minutes after the first plane was confirmed hijacked.



This official narrative leaves the public with one of two conclusions. Either the U.S. military is a wholly inept force incapable of defending the country from even the most rudimentarily hostile elements, rendering it the greatest illusion and farce the world has ever seen. Or on the morning of September 11, forces within its own ranks purposely blocked, hamstrung, and prevented the military apparatus from carrying out its most basic defensive responsibilities. In light of what we know the military can and has done in Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc., in light of the plan they surely have in place to defend the skies from a potential massive enemy air-attack with striking power infinitely more powerful than that of four unarmed civilian jumbo jets, the first hypothesis is out. Which leaves behind the only logical scenario. That rogue elements from within the military and government leadership itself either stood down the military apparatus to let the events of September 11 occur on purpose. Or the same rogue elements planned, facilitated, and helped carry out the attacks themselves. Either one would be high treason and mass murder. And there is overwhelming evidence to back up both.


www.911hardfacts.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


Well...I (and I am sure the OP, too) can easily see WHY you are laboring under so many misconceptions...since you saw fit to post those snippets fromthe "hardfacts" source...(the majority of the claims, and assumptions, just by reading through the portions you posted, are WRONG!).

As is, this from another post:


What about the Pentagon own defenses?


Can you see, now? ALL of the many, and varied, "conspiracy" claims have been made out of thin air, absent facts and research in many cases.

:shk: Yet, some people blindly accept what is written on those sorts of web sites, and totally ignore facts and eveidence to contrary, when presented. Stunning.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Since I'm so obviously wrong and misinformed, what is holding you back from posting arguments that blow my claims out of the water?




What about the Pentagon own defenses?


I'm not saying the Pentagon has a missile battery on it's roof, but surely they most have some system to prevent direct attack.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by Point of No Return]



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Since I'm so obviously wrong and misinformed, what is holding you back from posting arguments that blow my claims out of the water?




What about the Pentagon own defenses?


I'm not saying the Pentagon has a missile battery on it's roof, but surely they most have some system to prevent direct attack.

[edit on 10-6-2010 by Point of No Return]


Well they have police with handguns. Are you aware of anything beyond that ?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


NO. There was nothing that anticipated anything like an airplane, that had been hijacked, and was intent on a suicidal mission to crash into the Pentagon.

You only have to take amoment to LOOK at where the Pentagon is located.

Then you can see its proximity to Washington National Airport!

Airplanes flying by, every day, less than a mile away.

Anyway...the Pentagon is merely an office building. Paperwork. Gathering place for lots of brass...it WAS a more central component, when initially built. BUT, the Pentagon isn't the "center" of the US military, any more.

Maybe there aren't any "centers"...though, the Cheyenne Mountain Complex would come closest to that description.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 
If not a missile battery on the roof, what is it that we are looking for?

Subterranean machine gun nests? Tesla's death ray?

I have been to many US armed forces bases in the US in the past 30 years. The only ground-based anti-aircraft weapons that I have ever seen on any of them were non-functional displays that were either antiques of US origin, or Soviet built weapons that were captured in Iraq.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I'm sure that at least the skies above the centre of the worlds largest militairy force are secured and scanned for any possible attack, that includes a wayward plane flying towards it for over an hour, after other planes were reported hyjacked.

Don't you think?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Whatever you guys, you focus on the part of my post where I said Pentagon's own defenses, wich was not the main point.

You choose to ignore the maion point wich was:

Jeah, jeah, whatever, if you think that an hyjacked plane can make it all the way into the Pentagon, the centre of the world's largest militairy power, and into the WTC, the economical centre of the free world, without someone allowing it, you are crazy.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Point of No Return

Well, did they stop 911 from happening, like they should've, like logic would predict? No.

I rest my case.


That's a naive statement. It's like saying that cops should be stopping murders from happening, but since murders are still happening, it must mean cops are causing the murders to happen. The cops can't be everywhere at once, dude.

The entire 9/11 commission report is chock full of examples of how the gov't dropped the ball in preventing the 9/11 attack, from intelligence agencies being prevented from sharing information with each other, orders not being handed down the chain of command properly, people crapping out in their responsibilities, interceptors being ordered to fly in circles, and so on. I can believe this becuase I saw how the gov't couldn't even hand out bottles of water to hurricane survivors in New Orleans withotu slipping on banana peels and stumbling into walls and how Bush can't out a CIA agent without hordes of journalists tracing it back to him.

It's you conspiracy people who work under the daydream that everything in gov't is of such sheer flawlessness where mistakes are never made and everything is in complete perfection which rivals an act of God, so of course you're going to believe the failures listed in the commission report are a pack of lies. The gov't dropped the ball on 9/11 and they admitted they dropped the ball on 9/11. There ain't anything mystical or supernatural about it.


You totally took that out of context, I wasn't debating if Arabs were capable of terrorism, I said that I don't believe that the gov let it happen by accident, that the lack of response was not an accident.

Was it that hard to understand?


Yes it is, actually, becuase you're changing your story to suit your arguments. Previously in another thread, you had identified yourself as a MIHOP, and now you're apparently identifying yourself as a LIHOP. Did the gov't stage a fake terrorist attack or did the gov't allow a genuine attack to proceed? Pick on conspiracy story and stick with it, please.



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by iamcpc
 



Do you have a source for this information or is it your 100% un-expert opinion?


Yes, like the OS? It is chuck full of “100% un-expert opinion,” yet some people fall for it as demonstrated here.

My questions have already been posted in many 911 threads and have been answered with sources.
What does your comment to me have to do with Mikelee thread?

You absolutely have no idea what your are talking about.

The 911 commission rushed their report, is their lame excuse used by the OS believers, yet they are the one that continue to ignore the real facts that the 911 commissionaires admitted to [color=gold]out right lying . Go figure!


There is plenty more comments just go down the page.
www.invisibleempire.net...

Some of you guys can sit here and say, oh, the 911 commission didn’t have enough time to do their report and that is why so much was not done. What about the outrages lies that our government and military personal at the pentagon told, are you OS believers just going to ignore these facts as well, and pretend that you do not see it?

Really, I have heard some excuses, but this beats all.



as you made clear on this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

you just cited:

www.invisibleempire.net...

getting a significant amount of it's info from

911blogger.com...

and

blogs.villagevoice.com...


so

So you DON'T believe that the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, the Journal of Structural Engineering, the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Civil Engineering staff at the most prestigious engineering university on the planet, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as all the other universities Northwestern and Perdue are credible sources.

You said this here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

And blogs like 911blogger.com and blogs.villagevoice.com are credible sources????

You actually believe that teams of professors are not credible and bloggers are????





posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Point of No Return
 


Once again, you have been misled into the exagerrated claims by the "conspiracy" sites...


...that includes a wayward plane flying towards it for over an hour, after other planes were reported hyjacked.


Frankly, the Pentagon would have been the LEAST of my concerns, once it was confirmed that another one of the hijacked airplanes was enroute to the East Coast -- there was still no time, it was too early, to predict WHERE it was heading. They spent quite some time struggling to FIND it again, on radar.

As I said, the ATC radars just aren't designed to FIND airplanes ,that don't want to be found. So many variables, too...antenna locations, distances, etc....THAT'S WHY WE USE TRANSPONDERS!

HOWEVER, setting that aside....your "over an hour" claim is the problem, and a look at the timeline (that is what "conspiracy" folks don't want you to do) tells a different story.

Add the communications and confusion aspect...

0903 UAL 175 impact. It wasn't until then (and even then, it took more inutes for people to realize) that a pattern of hijacking, THEN attacks, was developing.

Pentagon hit at -- 0937. Is that "over an hour" to you?



posted on Jun, 10 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 





That's a naive statement. It's like saying that cops should be stopping murders from happening, but since murders are still happening, it must mean cops are causing the murders to happen. The cops can't be everywhere at once, dude.


That's a stupid statement.

Murders can't be stopped, cause cops don't have the location of possible mureders, nor can they see they are moving towrds potential targets.

The 4 hyjacked planes' positions were known at all times, I think two were still flying quite some time after the others hit the WTC.

Is it not standard procedure to intercept wayward or non responding planes?




The entire 9/11 commission report is chock full of examples of how the gov't dropped the ball in preventing the 9/11 attack, from intelligence agencies being prevented from sharing information with each other, orders not being handed down the chain of command properly, people crapping out in their responsibilities, interceptors being ordered to fly in circles, and so on.


Yes, by coincidence, they all failed on that particular day. Right.




It's you conspiracy people who work under the daydream that everything in gov't is of such sheer flawlessness where mistakes are never made and everything is in complete perfection which rivals an act of God, so of course you're going to believe the failures listed in the commission report are a pack of lies. The gov't dropped the ball on 9/11 and they admitted they dropped the ball on 9/11. There ain't anything mystical or supernatural about it.


It's not about mistakes. Procedures were not followed on that day. Like I said, you are naive like a little girl if you think these things happen because people weren't paying attention.

You really think they would screw up in protecting themselves?



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join