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.


9/11 even real pilots couldn't do it

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 06:00 AM
reply to post by diginess

Even if it was just the planes that caused the collapse of the towers, you still have too many coincidences, and too much cover up. For instance, why should there have been a Bush in charge of WTC security?
Why were two full Air Force national drills going on that day?
Why was there a FEMA drill to place a team fairly close to the impact area, with the team arriving before the event?
Why were there standing orders not to shoot the planes down, and why was there a rule placed in effect a month before that any shoot downs had to be approved by the Pentagon (Rumsfeld's orders)?
Why was the insurance for the WTC to cover a terrorism attack bought a month prior?
Why have none of the security camera footage been released by those cameras around the Pentagon that would have captured flight 77?
Why was all the WTC rubble shipped off to China?
Finally, if as the debunkers say, if it was a "misquote" by the BBC concerning tower 7 having already fallen, then why did they then claim to have lost the footage, when they have a policy in place to have two copies of all footage?

1) A Bush was not in charge of security - Marvin Bush was on board of
Securacom which was hired to install some security cameras

Securacom got the $8.3 million World Trade Center security contract in October 1996 and received about $9.2 million from the WTC job from 1996 (a quarter of its revenues that year) to 1998. But in 1998, the company was "excused from the project" because it could not fulfill the work, according to former manager Al Weinstein, and the electronic security work at the WTC was taken over by EJ Electric, a larger contractor.

Bush left the board in 2000 - year and half before 911

Marvin Bush was reelected annually to Securacom's board of directors from 1993 through 1999. His final reelection was on May 25, 1999, for July 1999 to June 2000. Throughout, he also served on the company's Audit Committee and Compensation Committee, and his stock holdings grew during the period. Directors had options to purchase 25,000 shares of stock annually. In 1996, Bush acquired 53,000 shares at 52 cents per share. Shares in the 1997 IPO sold at $8.50. Records since 2000 no longer list Bush as a shareholder.

2) Air Force drills

Well thats what the military does - drill

One of the drills was in Alaska. Now how is that revelant to WTC

Another was not scheduled until folllowing day - 9/12

List of exercises scheduled

3) Insurance

Why did Silverstein buy terrorism insurance ? Easy because the people loaning him the money required it. In fact Silverstein tried to buy LESS insurance , but the lenders forced him to purchase more to protect theit investments

4) Security Camera at Pentagon

Security cameras usually cover enterence/exit points to watch people entering and leaving

The part of the Pentagon struck by AA77 was away from the enterences

On the north side of the building, the Mall Entrance, which also features a portico, leads out to a 600 ft (180 m) long terrace that is used for ceremonies. The River Entrance, which features a portico projecting out 20 ft (6.1 m), is located on the northeast side, overlooking the lagoon and facing Washington. There is a stepped terrace on the River Entrance that leads down to the lagoon, and a landing dock which was used until the late 1960s to ferry personnel between the Bolling Air Force Base and the Pentagon.[45] The main entrance for visitors is located on the southeast side, where the Pentagon Metro station and the bus station are located. There is also a concourse on the southeast side of the second floor of the building, which contains a mini-shopping mall. The Pentagon's south parking lot is located on the southwest side of the Pentagon, and the west side of the Pentagon faces Washington Boulevard.

5) Wtc rubble being shipped to China

During recovery steel from WTC was recycled, some being shipped to China as scrap. Other parts were saved for use in monuments

The sections in the impact zone were saved for analysis by structural
experts to determine reasons for collapse

Also where do you store steel from 2 110 floor buildings?

There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures".

6) BBC tape

It was later found misfiled in archives under 2002

Like people dont make mistakes like this.......

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 06:43 AM
Perhaps the planes were not 767s and were instead military planes which were loaded with explosives and disguised in such a way that they looked like like passenger jets?

Perhaps the date was chosen to coinceide with a previous terrorist CIA backed attack in Chile (1973)

Perhaps the planes were controlled remotely by a signal eminating from the 'security' dept at TT...

Altho as the security dept and the owner of the building were AshkeNAZI Jews that's as unlikely as them being behind the ethnic cleansing of the non NAZI Jews during ww2 or even santas flying reindeer being a metaphor due to them being flying on magic mushrooms

Im not saying these are my opinions

i shall instead quote Bill Hicks
'I deal only in facts hence why I am a right cocky b******'

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:09 AM
I thought 9/11 is a closed matter, we won't know what happened anyway so why beat a dead horse?

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:27 AM
reply to post by fonenyc

First time i have heard anything about ufo's being reported on 9/11. sources? And thats all the first conspiracy of ufo's having anything to do with it, but who knows right. good thinking

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:43 AM
I just edited my post before you replied. Sorry.

Where did the planes, crew and passengers go etc?

This is an interesting video: Any thoughts?

[edit on 14-8-2010 by Nathan-D]

There is always a semi feasible option, that the people on board were killed in their seats after making the fone messages ( not sure from when the messages stopped before the planes collided) with gas which includes pilots and terrorists, then the plane was controlled remotely, that way people on board would still be there for DNA analysis, the terrorists could still be blamed and the maneouvers they made in colliding with the buildings explained,no matter how aerobatic ( I'm sure that during testing the aircraft in question were tested for limits and tolerances).

After all there apparently was another aircraft in the area and it was one that controls drones, and if the youtube videos where / are accurate there was a remote control pod on the belly of the second plane that was filmed from the ground, which can explain how the terrorists managed with little training to hit the buildings at the speeds they did, after all computers can make split second decisions with hardly any error and no stresses from gravity as they turn, any pilot pulling tight turns at high speed will be subject to G-forces that could interferre with their final positioning, a computer would have no such problems.

The people on board were there for collateral damage and DNA to 'help along' the 'investigation'.

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:09 AM
i believe someone should make an index thread in these forums with links to all of the most hilarious and obnoxious 9/11 truther threads.

This one belongs in the top 3.

Here's the qualifications:

1.) Must pretend to include real scientific data

That's it, really. Shouldn't be hard to find...because not a single one yet has been disqualified.

P.S. The mods should sticky it.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Snarf]

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:16 AM
reply to post by AlKaiserUk

Altho as the security dept and the owner of the building were AshkeNAZI Jews that's as unlikely as them being behind the ethnic cleansing of the non NAZI Jews during ww2 or even santas flying reindeer being a metaphor due to them being flying on magic mushrooms

So explain just what type of plane was used to disguise the attack ?

As for remote control - the modifactions necessary would have been
apparent to everybody. You don't just take a 757/767 for a few minutes

As for security the buildings were owned by the PORT AUTHORITY OF NY/NJ . The security chief for WTC was JOHN P ONEIL - a retired FBI
anti terrorist expert (and Catholic - expect you can make something out of that). Siloverstein was only leasing the site from Port Authority

As owner of the World Trade Center site, the Port Authority has worked since 2001 on plans for reconstruction of the site, along with Silverstein Properties, and the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. In 2006, the Port Authority reached a deal with Larry Silverstein, which ceded control of One World Trade Center to the Port Authority.[28] The deal gave Silverstein rights to build three towers along the eastern side of the site, including 150 Greenwich Street, 175 Greenwich Street, and 200 Greenwich Street.[28] Also part of the plans, is the World Trade Center Transportation Hub, which will replace the temporary PATH station that opened in November 2003.

37 of their men died at WTC

Police Officer David P. Lemagne Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Chief James Romito Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Richard Rodriguez Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Captain Kathy Mazza Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Liam Callahan Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer James Lynch Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Director Of Public Safety Fred V. Morrone Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer James Nelson Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Uhuru Gonja Houston Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Clinton Davis Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Alfonse Niedermeyer Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Paul Laszczynski Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Nathaniel Webb Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer John Lennon Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer George Howard Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Michael Wholey Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Inspector Anthony Infante Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Lieutenant Robert Cirri Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Kenneth Tietjen Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer John Levi Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Thomas Gorman Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Dominick Pezzulo Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Antonio Rodrigues Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Sergeant Robert Kaulfers Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Donald McIntyre Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Donald Foreman Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Christopher Amoroso Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Walter McNeil Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Maurice Barry Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Joseph Navas Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer James Parham Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Walwyn Stuart Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Bruce Reynolds Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer John Skala Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Gregg Froehner Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Stephen Huczko Jr. Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack
Police Officer Paul Jurgens Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack

Usual anti Jewish garabage......

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:27 AM
reply to post by thedman

" Police Officer John Lennon Tuesday, September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack "

Boy , that one-liner is probably gonna open up a whole new can of worms in the conspiracy department !

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:52 AM
This "opinion" presented in the OP is just another version, nothing new, of people (even pilots) misleading, for whatever agenda (that deserves a bit of find out WHAT those people involved here, are really about).

This topic abounds with seen by reading through the thread, so far. I have no doubt it will continue, no matter HOW many times the misunderstandings/misstatements are pointed out.

There is a Dutch documentary about 9/11, was about one hour long, and is broken up into the YouTube "bit-sized" bits. There is a segment floating around, of the one below, that has subtitles in English. This one (Part 4) is what I've found, just in first searches. It IS in Dutch, unfortunately. But, this is an Internation Board, and I'm sure we have some native Dutch speakers out there....

This shows some very average pilots (at least, I think they have SOME flying experience) in a fairly generic full motion simulator re-creating the flights into the Pentagon....three times, each time hitting the target with relative ease.

Now --- granted, this is NOT a B-757 simulator. It does resemble a jet, although ithe panel is in such darkenss, can't pick out any specifics.

(BTW...I have type ratings in the Boeing 757/767, in additon to the B-737 and DC-9/MD-80. I have ~20,000 hours total time, of which nearly 15,000 was during my career with a major US include the B-727, Airbus A-300, and the DC-10, in additon to the others already mentioned).

The blokes in the OP who say it was "too hard" to hit the targets, in the simulators? As was mentioned already....just how much did they WANT to 'fail"?? (Because, it really is NOT that difficult). Think about it. ALSO, some of their artificially-created 'parameters' seemed to be inconsistent with the facts of the actual airplanes used on 9/11.

I saw mention of a "180-degree turn at 500 MPH", if I example of falacious set-up, and a completely inaccurate attempt to "re-create" the events.

But, as I've mentioned above, anytime the topic of anything involving aviation comes into the mix, it is bound to be full of people's terribly ignorant misconceptions....laypersons interpret flying a heck of a lot differntly than professionals do....

Important to address yet ANOTHER earlier in-thread ention, re: AAL 77 at the Pentagon: That of "ground effect", and the notion that it flew for "over a mile" at low enough altitude to have ground effect become a factor.


What they demonstrate in the above video is very similar to the actual path of AAL 77....only time it was low-level enough for "ground effect" to be significant was for the very last second or so...but, in any case, at those airspeeds, and with slats/flaps retracted, isn't an issue anyway.

Only the pilots who wish to promote this fallacy of "impossible maneuvers", for whatever agenda they have, wish to keep obfuscating in the minds of "conspiracists".....with the mis-use of technical lingo and jargon.

"Real" pilots cringe at them...when we aren't slapping our foreheads in frustration at their antics. IF it wasn't such a serious issue, we'd laugh at any case, these claims exhibit no crediblity from those who make them.

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 11:37 AM
if your thread title was true in any way ....

you wouldnt be making the landmark discovery and there would be hundreds of thousand s of renound phds knocking the door to congress down with piles of data..

rather we get only a minute percentage of under qualified or psycholoigally bent psuedo scientists who think they no more then the best mind and pilots in the world

blah blah yeah there are a few even a bunch of people that have proved there own theorys true by bending the evidence in there favor the ignorance is outstanding and here it comes but what about john smith a retied army pilot just him hes the only one o wait there rich smith who is a phd and he says that the planes couldnt do those manuvers.

what about the rest of the scientific and aviation communtiy they were too busy or just overlooked 9/11 total ignorance at its finest

and all the rest its so predictable the comments that are text book here at ats about 9/11??????????

pure manipulation for self gratification !

trust me youve discovered nothing you found no hidden clue and your just wrong on so many levels but hey that would take all the fun and terror out of this day and make it what it was sad...

it was a sad day get over yourselves

and duh i know my words are futile in a thread like this but trust me i saw the second plane i heard the f N sound it made i saw it DID YOU??

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:25 PM
Flight 93 wasn't going 500 mph.

According to the reports the passengers tried taking over the plane and it crashed.So it wasn't going no 500 mph so there should have been plenty of debris there,but there wasn't.

And if professionals couldn't even do it on a SIMULATOR could you imagine emotions and adrenaline involved in real life?

Had they murdered the pilot with a box knife as there would be blood all over the seat, the controls, the center pedestal, the instrument panel and floor of the cockpit. The hijacker would have had to remove the dead pilot from his seat which means he would have had electrically or manually place the seat in its rearmost position and then lifted the murdered pilot from his seat, further distributing blood, making the controls including the throttles wet, sticky and difficult to hold onto.

Even on a clear day a novice pilot couldn't take control and turn a 767 towards New York,no situational awareness under these conditions. The alleged hijackers were not 'instrument rated' and controlled high altitude flight requires experience in constantly referring to and cross-checking attitude, altitude and speed instruments. Using the distant horizon to fly 'visually' under controlled conditions is virtually impossible particularly at the cruising speed of the Boeing 767 of .80 Mach

The alleged 'controlled' descent into New York on a relatively straight course by a novice pilot in unlikely in the extreme because of the difficulty of controlling heading, descent rate and descent speed within the parameters of 'controlled' flight

It takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the "EFIS" (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent. The Boeing 767 does not fly itself nor does it automatically correct any misuse of the controls.

The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.

it would have been impossible for an alleged hijacker with little or no time in the Boeing 767 to have taken over, then flown a Boeing 767 at high speed, descending to below 1000 feet above mean sea level and flown a course to impact the twin towers at high speed for these reasons.

With the clacker clacking plus the tremendous air noise against the windshield and the bucking bronco-like airplane, exceeding the Boeing 767 maximum stability limits and encountering early morning turbulence caused by rising irregular currents of air.

The 'clacker' is a loud clacking sound, designed to be irritating, to instantly get the attention of the pilot that he is exceeding the FAA-authorized speed of the aircraft. The clacker had no circuit breaker on September 11, 2001 although it does now simply because one or more accidents were caused, in part, by the inability to silence the clacker which made decision, tempered with reasoning, impossible because of the noise and distraction.

Marvin Bush was on the board of directors of Securacom[secure-a-con] from 1993-2000. The company was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served...

It's common knowledge look up on wikipedia!And just because he left in 2000 doesn't mean nothing.He could have had people put in place before he left.What better way to get explosives inside a secured building?...have people working for the security.

According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Secure-a-con differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

Out of all the jobs and places to work the President's brother chose security at the World Trade Center(they had such high hopes for him) and this doesn't strike the debunkers as suspicious one bit lol...I mean come on!

These are the two insurance companies responsible for paying Larry Silverstein 7 billion for two separate terrorist attack claims.

Swiss RE
Munich RE

Here`s the twist. These companies were caught and investigated for buying huge amounts of PUT options on American and United Airlines stock right before 9/11.

Lucky Larry Silverstein keeps popping up. Hes back and hes bad again. Not content with the nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments he received to cover his losses at the World Trade Center, he is now seeking $12.3 billion in damages from the airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack in a suit filed in 2004....Larry's not all about the money...nooo not Larry.

That Larry!

Silversteins laundry list for the $12.3 billion goes like this, $8.4 billion for the replacement of destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the Port authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings

The total claims involved come to about $23 billion. Silverstein's chunk could endanger claims from other businesses and property owners, defense lawyers say. Why, Donald Migliori himself, the lawyer for the victims families, said he was confident that their claims would not be affected because they would take priority over the property claims

At the towers..In addition to this the control, although hydraulically boosted, would be very stiff. Just the slightest control movements would have sent the airplane up or down at thousands of feet a minute. To propose that an alleged hijacker with limited experience could get a Boeing 767 lined up with a 208 foot wide target and keep it lined up and hold his altitude at exactly 800 feet while being aurally bombarded with the clacker is beyond the realm of possibility!

edit-put a paragraph in the wrong spot.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by XxiTzYoMasterxX]

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:25 PM
Gotta agree with this one!!!
1. Those airplanes, are NOT designed, for THAT much speed, at THAT altitude (the air, is too THICK!)
2. Those aircraft, are NOT aerobatic!! Those tight turns, would likely tear the wings/tail off, leading to a nose-down dive!
3. It took me SEVERAL practices, in a Leer 24, to be able to do a simple loop, around the Golden gate bridge. And, I, am an experienced aerobatic pilot! (Yes, in a simulater!!- i want to KEEP my ticket!)
4. The flight, that "hit" the Pentagon- supposedly, flew three (?) times, over DC, looking for the Capital???? WTF??? Washington Monument, Mall, Capital- one HUGE landmark! Were they BLIND??

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:26 PM
Cmon people, stick to the discussion.
Its a remote controlled military airplane, controlled by trained pilot and there are no hijacker at all.

Think Predator UAV and make it big.

I play flight simulation games since 1991
- I only manage to land safely 2 times. 1 on a carrier, 1 on base.
- I only manage to crash to "friendly base" once, others are off target or total miss or I eject

- Landing is hard and since we are targeting a building here, its darn too hard

I usually takeoff and turn back and hit my own base because I hate to wait the enemy show up (15mins of nothing!).

So, in response to OP and everyone, I urge you to try it yourself. Below is a flight game simulator. Test to your heart content and see yourself.

Download Flight Simulator

Have fun crashing to the ATC tower coz no foxtrot here

[edit on 16-8-2010 by RainCloud]

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:32 PM
reply to post by XxiTzYoMasterxX

so your are the one the final whistle blower alone in a battle for truth against the government yeah okay mr research why not trying to perform research as the word means exploring all venues not the ones that prove the theory if you bend them just right . but i will alert the media and the green lantern of your monumental discovery holy sh.t an atser has single handidly taken down the US government.

my lord

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:41 PM
As usual , stupid comments. The source is not saying that it didn't happen, only that "untrained terrorist" couldn't do it.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by ickylevel]

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:53 PM
reply to post by ickylevel

thats the point all this nonsense when called out goes into o thats not exactly what i meant or a play on words its obvious what the intentions were obvious inference

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 12:58 PM
reply to post by Snarf

snarfin A !!!

its getting to the point where i am told im wrong for being an eyewitness and some how i was duped i was standing right there !!!

and these idiots in texas or idaho tell me what i saw with ficticious facts and psuedo science

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 01:12 PM
reply to post by triplescorpio

What do you mean you were there?What are you saying?You saw a plane hit the tower?Is that what you're saying?No one is saying it wasn't a plane.But it wasn't your average 757.So keep saying "no plane" in the hopes someone will think that this is what the thread is about when it actuality,it isn't.

This isn't a "no plane" thread it's a "9/11 even real pilots couldn't do it" thread.

Because we all know that if professional pilots couldn't do it on a simulator, then there is no way a couple of rookies could do it in real life.

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 01:48 PM
reply to post by XxiTzYoMasterxX

exactly what i excpected the usual rederick when the obvious is pruposed !

your OP as you would call it to sound snazzy or whatever . is dellusional at best!

i gurantee if my words were to support what you are saying the thread is nt about youd be all stars and flags however when the dellusional points of veiw are pushed against the wall all of a sudden i have to be right on topic and not introducing any insenuations that might stray .








posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 02:35 PM

Rabbi Dov Zakheim and System Planning Corporation

This is another Zionist guy that was also involved with the missing Trillions of Dollars from the Pentagon mentioned conveniently by Rhumsfeld the day prior to 9/11.
It is also where the Pentagon strike occured, exactly where the missing Trillions were being investigated by the Offices of the Office of Naval Intelligence.
What a cool way in which to cover your you think that this is by coincidence as well ?
If so, then I have a Bridge to sell you , real cheap !!!

But the relevance to this thread is that , his company, System Planning Corporation the systems that were designed to allowed one to commandeer an aircraft remotely in the event the captain was disabled, and fly it or land it or CRASH it where ever !

So just perhaps this is how they did it. Because those pilots didn't have the skill to hit 3 out of 3 based upon the flight paths of those planes.

Go out and take a few lessons in piloting a Cessna 152, even smaller and easier to handle than a 172 and see how many lessons before you can even land the thing at 60 knots.....which is their stall speed.

And Not piloting a jet liner at 400-500 knots which is what these nitwit hijackers supposedly did. Even after the flight instructors said that they couldn't have....

Take some flight lessons and put your money where your mouth is and see how difficult it actually is.

The company is called "System Planning Corporation" and what is hilarious is that the flight control system is called "Flight Termination System" !
It sounds as if it was specifically designed for 9/11, they should rename it the 9/11 Flight Termination system !!!

[edit on 16-8-2010 by nh_ee]

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in