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.

 

12/17/10 Jesse Ventrura Pentagon Episode

page: 4
47
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


No you are wrong, this was covered in Fahrenheit 9/11. The flight school told the "would-be hijackers" that they did not have the skills to be pilots. Michael Moore did not dare go near the more damning evidence like financial records at building 7 but even his film covered this basic flaw in the official story, those maneuvers were impossible. Open your eyes or history will remember you as a fool.




posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


And their resident skeptic has how much time as a pilot?

He said he had some. Plus he knew he wasn't going to die after the simulator, so would have been more relaxed and calm to hit the target than Hani.


I refuse to watch the show, because so far, the "facts" normally used by that show, dont stand up to the test of reality.

How would you know if you refuse to watch the show?
edit on 18-12-2010 by ATH911 because: typo



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


It's not a coincidence. Multiple attempts at completing cell calls were made, the ones that succeeded were within the performance envelope. That's what is called reality.

Evidence for that?

2



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


And their resident skeptic has how much time as a pilot?

He said he had some. Plus he knew he wasn't going to die after the simulator, so would have been more relaxed and calm to hit the target than Hani.


I refuse to watch the show, because so far, the "facts" normally used by that show, dont stand up to the test of reality.

How would you know if you refuse to watch the show?
edit on 18-12-2010 by ATH911 because: typo
Because ignorance is bliss.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
You know when I watched the show, none of it was really new news to me except one key point that no one here has yet to mention.

How do we explain the woman that walked out of the entry point of the building with her child? She says she saw no sign of a plane. That is rather curious. And if lets say, she somehow missed evidence of a plane being smashed inside her building, a 757 mind you, shouldn't there have been a heck of a lot of heat right after impact? It sounds like she escaped through that entry hole pretty quickly after impact.The time it took to collect her child and get out. How long could that have possibly taken as her office was pretty close to the entry point? Even if it was like 15 or 20 minutes, still seems like it should have been way to hot to go that direction.

Also seems to me she should have been tripping or climbing over plane wreckage as well, but it appears she didn't.

So for me, that was the one really new and interesting key to the puzzle. Im surprised no one here is tearing that one up yet.
edit on 18-12-2010 by onehuman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWatcher11
 


Michael Moore as a source? You are kidding right??

Here is some food for thought for you

www.salon.com...



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


When it takes all of two seconds to disprove the "facts" Jesse uses, that people like you post on here....WHY waste my time watching a show where the writers cannot do basic research???????



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by vipertech0596
 


That does not detract form what the flight school said about the trainee pilots. Unless they were all telling massive porkies to confuse the world.

If you fail to grasp the idea that something else was going on that morning then you are not paying attention.

Good luck to you.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


Oh, its found in any number of OTHER threads you have started about flight 93 on ATS. You didnt read that there appearantly, why spend the time reposting it?



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


When it takes all of two seconds to disprove the "facts" Jesse uses, that people like you post on here....WHY waste my time watching a show where the writers cannot do basic research???????

But how do you know what facts he uses if you refuse to watch the show?



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWatcher11
 


And yet, you continue to ignore the facts that the hijackers kept working on their skills and learning enough to earn pilot's licenses. And that their later instructors fully believe they had the skills to do what they did. I am not the one that is blind my friend.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I watched this episode earlier on this evening and it didn't contain any information that I hadn't heard years ago so it was a bit of a waste of time really. There was something that really stood out to me though, but it was more to do with the show than the actual conspiracy.

During the episode they really made a big deal out of the pentagon footage of the crash. Jesse questioned the 911 commision representative on why the other footage was locked away and secret from the public to which she answered that she didn't know. But why in GOD's name did he not ask her directly whether or not she personally has in fact seen any other footage that clearly showed a plane hitting the pentagon? Why?

Or maybe he did. Maybe they didn't like the answer and edited it out. All I know is that's what I would have wanted to know.

As a side note, what the hell is it with the new guy on the show? The wannabee Tom Cruise from Vanilla Sky era lookalike? He's obviously spent a great deal of time in front of the mirror practicing the various facial expressions of Tom, but is this guy useless or what?



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ATH911
 


Oh, its found in any number of OTHER threads you have started about flight 93 on ATS. You didnt read that there appearantly, why spend the time reposting it?

Why do you make things up?

Talk about criticizing Jesse for incorrect facts!



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by mayabong
 
it's actually a pretty common occurrence in government,money goes missing all the time.



posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by xweaponx
 


Well....I see that GenRadek and vipertech have already cleared up the "AirFone" situation.
Good.

In your reply to GenRadek, you wrote:


Know what makes me laugh more and more. YOUR NOT A PILOT! You know nothing about planes.
I'm a pilot and I fly for delta ....


Well, "nice" to make your online acquaintance.

I am too, but not DAL. (CAL...ALPA Council 170) On medical LOA, at the moment. Last System Bid was the B-757/767 CA. Typed also in the B-737 and DC-9. 22+ at CAL.
------(intentionally used a bit of shorthand there...as a "fellow airline pilot" I'm assuming you'll understand?)-------

And, I do happen to know a "little something" about airplanes....nearly four decades' worth, actually.


...each plane is different a 757 that is newer meaning built in the last 10 -15 years "MIGHT" have an airphone.


????? Well, as I said, it's been covered already. BUT....ummmm, you do know that it doesn't MATTER how "old" the airframe is, right? Airlines can retro-fit interiors, and equipment, regardless...


.... I encourage you to go have a private pilot take you up and you try and make a call. Dropping from 3500 to 0 feet can take less then 30 seconds.


????? Do you really wish to suggest that a General Aviation airplane can descend at +7,000 fpm ??
Give me a type, it's intriguing..... (and, OW!! My Eustachian tubes hurt!!)



I think it's so funny that these "debunkers" on here wanna talk about planes but yet hardly none of them have even flown a jumbo jet.


Well you can talk to me, then. I'll try not to laugh.


Cellphone/AirFone "arguments" are mere distractions, really. MINOR compared to the junk spewed from Jesse Ventura's pie-hole in that crap show......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, and a little bug in the back of my head was bothering me, from your post. This sentence:


I had my cell off and then turned it on I suspect a little under 10,000 feet and well over 250 knots in a Boeing 737-400 and could not get ANY signal while still over a major metro area (Seattle).


The bolded and underlined part.

You said you fly for Delta...which I took at face value. THEN, you wrote that, and it triggered my "BS" flag. Because, as far as I recall, Delta has NEVER HAD any B-737-400s.

USAir does. In fact, they might be the only U.S. operator of that model. (I will look it up too....)**[Just checked, I forgot about Alaska Airlines. THEY have the -400s too, about 30 of 'em. USAir has 40]....

....because, just to be sure, I did look up Delta's fleet, before editing here:

(from website that lists airline fleets, source below):

Boeing 737
Boeing 737-200
Boeing 737-300

Boeing 737 Next Gen
Boeing 737-700
Boeing 737-800


www.airfleets.net...

(I included the 737NG list as well --- even though the -400 is NOT an "NG" it's the "classic".... It is a stretched -300, really).
...
So....a few options:

  • You hit the wrong key, when typing?
  • You were non-revving (OAL...on another airline), on the jumpseat?
  • You were non-revving (OAL), in the cabin?
  • Or....fill in the blank:______________________


    edit on 18 December 2010 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



  • posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:29 PM
    link   
    reply to post by ATH911
     


    Because people like you post them on here, along with snippets of video from the show. Doesnt anyone pay attention to all the posts in these threads?



    posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:30 PM
    link   
    reply to post by RMFX1
     


    Maybe because during the FBI investigation they went through all the videos and the only ones that actually showed ANYTHING related to Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, were released through FOIA requests????



    posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:32 PM
    link   
    reply to post by ATH911
     


    LOL, start using the search feature on the threads. Or start going through the thread history on your profile.



    posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:36 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by onehuman
    You know when I watched the show, none of it was really new news to me except one key point that no one here has yet to mention.

    How do we explain the woman that walked out of the entry point of the building with her child? She says she saw no sign of a plane. That is rather curious. And if lets say, she somehow missed evidence of a plane being smashed inside her building, a 757 mind you, shouldn't there have been a heck of a lot of heat right after impact? It sounds like she escaped through that entry hole pretty quickly after impact.The time it took to collect her child and get out. How long could that have possibly taken as her office was pretty close to the entry point? Even if it was like 15 or 20 minutes, still seems like it should have been way to hot to go that direction.

    Also seems to me she should have been tripping or climbing over plane wreckage as well, but it appears she didn't.

    So for me, that was the one really new and interesting key to the puzzle. Im surprised no one here is tearing that one up yet.
    edit on 18-12-2010 by onehuman because: (no reason given)


    The reason the believers will make will something along the lines of, 'She was obviously under mental duress, the only thing on her mind obviously was saving her and her babies life. She wouldnt have been looking around taking mental notes. Besides..she passed out once she got outside. She couldnt have been too lucid.'
    They always have an answer.
    The people with questions, always have a 'theory'.
    Kind of funny.



    posted on Dec, 18 2010 @ 04:39 PM
    link   
    reply to post by vipertech0596
     


    OMG. You just make this non-sense up as you go.
    They kept practicing their skills?
    Even if they did, which I haven't seen documentation of, their skills couldnt have been so advanced as to defy physics.
    The plane CANT go that fast without falling apart mid-air.



    new topics

    top topics



     
    47
    << 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

    log in

    join