Visibility 911: A dozen Questons about Flight 77 from Kevin Ryan

911blogger.com...

# Exactly how was Flight 77 hijacked, considering, among other things, that the alleged hijackers were said to be identified as security risks (possibly linked to al Qaeda) when they tried to board, and were not physically imposing (all 5 and a half feet tall or less, and slender in build)?[1]
# How was the nation’s air defense system disabled on 9/11, and how could anything have hit the Pentagon approximately 80 minutes after the first plane was known to be hijacked?
# Why was Dick Cheney tracking Flight 77?[2]

And 9 more similar style questions. Some are easy to explain away, 5 and 6 would need a lot of research, the others well, I don't have all the answers. Seems a lot on the Pentagon recently, looks like the OS is evaporating and more are asking questions.

Peace

reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy

I read too much into this one-
These are just questions, for some reason I was expecting the author to have a theory on each one.
I will add this-
Why won't the Pentagon release their footage? They must have at least a dozen angles of...

Uhh 5.5 feet with a butter knife to the throat of some one. Would you make a sudden move if some unknown skinny dude had a butter knife to your mothers throat??

The air defense wasn’t disabled it was muted. Until that time we had no plans on how to deal with suicide planes. Does your family have plans in place to deal with a home invasion? Terrorists need to come up with something new and different to make a statement. They used to hi jack planes but we figured out how to prevent that tactic.

Who had the nerve , not authority, to give the order to shoot down a civilian air liner a mere 80 minutes into an event now one had ever seen or expected. Would you have risked prosecution given the same circumstances? Was it certain at that point in time another plane was going to be flown into the Pentagon? The target could have been the White House and they have their own procedures and defenses.

Dick Cheney was tracking the plane for the same reason we track tornados. You make it seem he was the only one tracking the planes. Scientifically speaking I think the plan was to make sure that he and the plane don’t try to occupy the same space at the same time.

They must have at least a dozen angles of...

Did they? Or did the military prefer guards at that point in time? Lets assume they had cameras on each corner of the building and you were the cameraman. Would your cameras be pointed up or down?

reply to post by yyyyyyyyyy


As per truther SOP, these are not "questions" but simply baseless accusations with question marks at the end.

Originally posted by samkent
Uhh 5.5 feet with a butter knife to the throat of some one. Would you make a sudden move if some unknown skinny dude had a butter knife to your mothers throat??

I wouldn't, but another passenger who did not know she was my mother would, if he judged his life was going to depend upon taking this direct action. Your argument is as weak as wet paper.

Originally posted by samkent
The air defense wasn’t disabled it was muted. Until that time we had no plans on how to deal with suicide planes. Does your family have plans in place to deal with a home invasion? Terrorists need to come up with something new and different to make a statement. They used to hi jack planes but we figured out how to prevent that tactic.

No plans? Totally wrong. There had long been a contingency to shoot down a hijacked plane if necessary.

Originally posted by samkent
Who had the nerve , not authority, to give the order to shoot down a civilian air liner a mere 80 minutes into an event now one had ever seen or expected. Would you have risked prosecution given the same circumstances? Was it certain at that point in time another plane was going to be flown into the Pentagon? The target could have been the White House and they have their own procedures and defenses.

You are missing the point. The issue is not why no planes were shot down but why no military fighter jets were ordered into the air to intercept any of the hijacked planes. I can tell you why. Because several war games were being conducted that morning, and there was total confusion whether the reported hijackings were part of these games.

Originally posted by samkent
Dick Cheney was tracking the plane for the same reason we track tornados. You make it seem he was the only one tracking the planes. Scientifically speaking I think the plan was to make sure that he and the plane don’t try to occupy the same space at the same time.

Really? Don't make me laugh. The truth has emerged that he WAS ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE WAR GAMES BEING CONDUCTED THAT MORNING. If there was any chance Flight 77 was going to target his bunker, you don't really think he would have risked staying there, do you? He stayed there because he was in on the 9/11 plot and knew his location was not targeted, THAT'S WHY!!!

They must have at least a dozen angles of...

Originally posted by samkent
Did they? Or did the military prefer guards at that point in time? Lets assume they had cameras on each corner of the building and you were the cameraman. Would your cameras be pointed up or down?

Again you miss the point. The FBI had said that it holds (I believe) 84 camera videos of the area around the Pentagon. But it won't release any. If the fable that a large jet like Flight 77 hit the Pentagon were true, they would have no reason for withholding them. But of course, it isn't true, and so they cannot show us what actually hit the Pentagon.

Originally posted by micpsi
I wouldn't, but another passenger who did not know she was my mother would, if he judged his life was going to depend upon taking this direct action. Your argument is as weak as wet paper.

That's the point though. Nobody would have judged that their lives depended on it because in the past hijackers had usually landed planes and released hostages. Their best guess would have been to do nothing, obey orders and pray.

And that's without even allowing for the all-engulfing fear they would have experienced. It really is ridiculous to look back with 20/20 hindsight and say, "well, they all must have known they were going to die unless they fought back". Especially as the only passengers for whom this became apparent actually did fight back.

No plans? Totally wrong. There had long been a contingency to shoot down a hijacked plane if necessary.

Which they quite possibly did. I've seen it argued - by Truthers - that Cheney's comment about the "order still standing" refers to an order to shoot and an order not to shoot. But with regard to 9/11 it's easy to understand why the procedure was not completely clinical. It's easy to make tough resolutions about protocol in theory. A lot harder to carry them out.

And you should remember that what was happening was unclear until much later than is now generally remembered.

You are missing the point. The issue is not why no planes were shot down but why no military fighter jets were ordered into the air to intercept any of the hijacked planes.

But that's just wrong. Military jets were scrambled.

I can tell you why. Because several war games were being conducted that morning, and there was total confusion whether the reported hijackings were part of these games.

Which is not in itself suspicious.

I'm often told that it's odd how many "exercises" were going on on 9/11. That there were huge numbers. But what does the military do all day in peace time? Presumably practice stuff. And a war game involving hijacked aircraft is a coincidence, but not necessarily anything more.

Again you miss the point. The FBI had said that it holds (I believe) 84 camera videos of the area around the Pentagon. But it won't release any. If the fable that a large jet like Flight 77 hit the Pentagon were true, they would have no reason for withholding them. But of course, it isn't true, and so they cannot show us what actually hit the Pentagon.

That's not actually the case. The FBI responded to the FOIA request by saying that there were 84 videos around the Pentagon, but that ultimately only two pertained to the request - ie had footage that might be relevant. They released both of those.

Originally posted by yyyyyyyyyy
911blogger.com...

#Exactly how was Flight 77 hijacked, considering, among other things, that the alleged hijackers were said to be identified as security risks (possibly linked to al Qaeda) when they tried to board, and were not physically imposing (all 5 and a half feet tall or less, and slender in build)?

this is 100% speculation on my part, but from the details coming from the passenger telephone calls, every plane reported that at least one stewardess was seriously injured or killed. This implies that it was specifically part of their plan that in the initial stages of the hijacking they would grab a stewardess and murder her in cold blood to intimidate the remaining passengers.

# How was the nation’s air defense system disabled on 9/11, and how could anything have hit the Pentagon approximately 80 minutes after the first plane was known to be hijacked?

It was never disabled- interceptors were scrambled from Massachussets and Virginia. That's another internet rumor being passed around by those...well, I'm not going to say it.

# Why was Dick Cheney tracking Flight 77?[2]

Becuase he was in Washington while Bush was On Air Force One, and he was relaying messages from Bush I.E the civil air traffic grounding order and the shoot down order. Plus, Flight 77 was heading directly at him and he had no idea where it was heading.

And 9 more similar style questions. Some are easy to explain away, 5 and 6 would need a lot of research, the others well, I don't have all the answers. Seems a lot on the Pentagon recently, looks like the OS is evaporating and more are asking questions.

The truther movement making up their own version of things to suit their conspiracy claims isn't making the OS evaporate. It's embellishment.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
[
this is 100% speculation on my part, but from the details coming from the passenger telephone calls, every plane reported that at least one stewardess was seriously injured or killed. This implies that it was specifically part of their plan that in the initial stages of the hijacking they would grab a stewardess and murder her in cold blood to intimidate the remaining passengers.

Every plane reported that at least one stewardess was seriously injured or killed?
Please provide proof on this.

I got a feeling......that Dave is doing exactly what he claims truthers do.