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.

 

9/11 and Cyberterrorism: Did the real "cyber 9/11" happen on 9/11?

page: 2
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I have provided information. You have failed in every attempt to refute this information.

You have no right to make queries if you cannot refute the information presented in an intelligent, mature manner.
Until then. You fail.
edit on 11-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
reply to post by waypastvne
 


You have been debunked and proven ignorant in every 911 thread you post on, I dont know why you bother here as well.

Read the first post young man and try to refute the evidence point by point rather than regurgitate nonsensical rants.
edit on 11-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


Here is one
For two years prior to 9/11, Ptech was working to identify potential problems or weaknesses in the FAA's response plans to events like a terrorist hijacking of a plane over U.S. airspace. According to their own business plan for their contract with the FAA, Ptech was given access to every process and system in the FAA dealing with their crisis response protocols. This included examining key systems and infrastructure to analyze the FAA's "network management, network security, configuration management, fault management, performance management, application administration, network management and user desk help operations." In short, Ptech had free reign to examine every FAA system and process for dealing with the exact type of event that was to occur on 9/11. Even more incredible, researcher Indira Singh points out that Ptech was specifically analyzing the potential interoperability problems between the FAA, NORAD and the Pentagon in the event of an emergency over U.S. airspace.

edit on 11-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


So you can't give me a description of what the FAAs does. I didn't think so.

The FAA's major roles include:
Regulating U.S. commercial space transportation
Regulating air navigation facilities' geometry and flight inspection standards
Encouraging and developing civil aeronautics, including new aviation technology
Issuing, suspending, or revoking pilot certificates
Regulating civil aviation to promote safety, especially through local offices called Flight Standards District Offices
Developing and operating a system of air traffic control and navigation for both civil and military aircraft
Researching and developing the National Airspace System and civil aeronautics
Developing and carrying out programs to control aircraft noise and other environmental effects of civil aviation

Are you going to explain how Ptech pulled off 911. Or are you just going say there is a company called Ptech owned by jews, and a government agency called the FAA and leave it to the truthers imagination to fill in the blanks ?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder
I have provided information. You have failed in every attempt to refute this information.

You have no right to make queries if you cannot refute the information presented in a intelligent, mature manner.
Until then. You fail.
edit on 11-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


OK, here ya go;

In short, Ptech's software was not running on any critical systems that were not responding to the attacks of 9/11 on 9/11 itself.

There, my statement now has as much validity as yours. Debunk that.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


THIS is the reality of how things work at the FAA and ATC:













This is the way it went down, as people (professionals) dealt with the events in real time, in the sometimes chaotic way that such things happen, and people react.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
The 911 war game exercises is what impeded the speedily aquitsition of the hijack airliners. The problem is there were mulitple ( up to 15 ) real and fake blips on radar screen. There were multiple live fly hijacking and cruise missile scenarios as well as terrorism drill scheduled for the morning of September 11,2001 at pier 92 in New York city by FEMA.


IS this real world or exercise. Many norad, faa workers took some time to realize the events were 'real world' but then it was too late.

There were 4 war game exercises on the morning of September 11.

edit on 11-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Your stupid Truther Mistake was choosing the FAA to team up your Petch crap evidence with, The FAA doesn't control or monitor anything in real time. They are a before and after the fact agency. They try to prevent accidents, chose someone to blame after accidents and make stupid rules in between. The only way the FAA would know whats going on in the sky at any given point in time is to go out side and look up. If a bunch of FAA employes came in to an ATC and took over, they wouldn't know what to do or how to do it. The FAA does not control the skies, they regulate the skies.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow HerderEven more incredible, researcher Indira Singh points out that Ptech was specifically analyzing the potential interoperability problems between the FAA, NORAD and the Pentagon in the event of an emergency over U.S. airspace


Perhaps you missed this part??

If they had details of the systems that were in place, then they could potentially know how to confuse or bypass them. Given that the systems WERE confused on the day, then this conclusion is possible.

Thanks for the info Shadow Herder - I don't think this is definitive proof of anything, but its definately another piece in the puzzle. I don't think we'll ever have any hard, 100% proof kind of evidence, but findings like these just add up in the pile of things that are suspicious and/or don't make sense about 9/11.

Do you have any more background info on Ptech and are they connected to 9/11 in any other ways?



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cecilofs

Originally posted by Shadow HerderEven more incredible, researcher Indira Singh points out that Ptech was specifically analyzing the potential interoperability problems between the FAA, NORAD and the Pentagon in the event of an emergency over U.S. airspace


Perhaps you missed this part??



Nope I didn't miss a thing. If you think the FAA played any kind of an active role on 911 please tell me what you think it is. Do you think the ATC calls the FAA and Then the FAA calls NORAD ? The FAA was not in the loop, They are an after the event agency.



posted on Oct, 11 2011 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


I don't know what role if any the FAA played. The point is if you have information on how the systems work and especially where the problems are, then you can potentially exploit those problems.

In this case, since the software was running on those systems at the time, then its possible it was doing more than monitoring and possibly contributed to the confusion which meant that there was no intercept of the jets.

Note the use of the words "possibly" and "potentially".



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cecilofs
reply to post by waypastvne
 


In this case, since the software was running on those systems at the time, then its possible it was doing more than monitoring and possibly contributed to the confusion which meant that there was no intercept of the jets.


This evidence surely seems to suggest that.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by Cecilofs
reply to post by waypastvne
 


In this case, since the software was running on those systems at the time, then its possible it was doing more than monitoring and possibly contributed to the confusion which meant that there was no intercept of the jets.


This evidence surely seems to suggest that.


Where exactly does it suggest that ? Be specific.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by Cecilofs
reply to post by waypastvne
 


In this case, since the software was running on those systems at the time, then its possible it was doing more than monitoring and possibly contributed to the confusion which meant that there was no intercept of the jets.


This evidence surely seems to suggest that.


Where exactly does it suggest that ? Be specific.


I am starting to believe now that you are imbalanced or have some sort of deficiency. Read and watch the videos kiddo. Sigh and dont stalk my threads with such ignorance. Its annoying.



posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Let's stop defending those who had their pants down ---> and are now giving it to us...for a change huh?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1   >>

log in

join