Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

9/11 WAR GAMES Allowed the Attacks to Happen - Video

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Here is the video in question


" We fought many phantoms that day... we received many calls about planes that turned out to be phantoms."
edit on 12-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 12 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


Nice effort, but its getting blatantly obvious that some people are not here because they are looking for information, but because they want to drive the story home that they built up in their own mind, wether it is to convince themselves that it is really santa claus handing our presents and not some guy in a costume, or others. You can only play chess if your opponent abides to the rules. If he starts throwing feces at you to keep you from making your move, well thats not really chess now is it?
edit on 12-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   
there is a video too of an angry rumsfeld complaining how the military shouldnt have made those disclosures. Oh I realized his statement is in the second video as well.
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



"Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what's known as an 'inject,' is purged from the screens". This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.

Huh? What indicates that there were false radar blips on the radars of air traffic controllers? You think the military places false blips on the radar screens of civilian atc?

Here is the video in question


" We fought many phantoms that day... we received many calls about planes that turned out to be phantoms."

Remember Hooper? You got your but handed to you yet again..... Why do you even bother?



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 


So please post some evidence that the military installed false images on the radar screens of civilian ATC.

Someday, maybe, far in the future, you'll actually answer a question.

But I doubt it.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


Your evidence is right there in the video. The "exercise" that jammed the surveillance for NORAD was not terminated until after the attacks.

But if it wasnt an inside job, who jammed the surveillance of NORAD? Did Alquaeda gain knowledge of the date and time of the exercise an exercise that would jam the surveilance capabilities of NORAD and redirect interceptors away from the east coast and merely exploited this exercise?
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by hooper
 


Your evidence is right there in the video. The "exercise" that jammed the surveillance for NORAD was not terminated until after the attacks.

But if it wasnt an inside job, who jammed the surveillance of NORAD? Did Alquaeda gain knowledge of the date and time of the exercise an exercise that would jam the surveilance capabilities of NORAD and redirect interceptors away from the east coast and merely exploited this exercise?
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


You know, this is actually kind of possible. I've been personally suspecting that the government allowed the hijackers to somehow make it as far as they did. Messing with radar and perhaps giving the intel "accidentally" to the hijackers that 9/11 was the day to launch the attack would certainly create an interesting scenario. I still think that the collapses were not expected by any parties, but it made the day that much more powerful.

I bet you that had the towers not collapsed, 9/11 would still very much be a prelude to war, because though the symbol would not be as strong, the knowledge of the defenses of the US being fragile would send the nation into a state of defense, and as they say "the best defense is a good offense."

But again, it would not be beyond the powers of technology in 2001 to mess with radar. It could be hidden in any routine program and then erased (or even have an automatic deletion command) when it is investigated. That way, attempting to divulge what was actually on the radar would only show normal traffic.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by hooper
 


Your evidence is right there in the video. The "exercise" that jammed the surveillance for NORAD was not terminated until after the attacks.

But if it wasnt an inside job, who jammed the surveillance of NORAD? Did Alquaeda gain knowledge of the date and time of the exercise an exercise that would jam the surveilance capabilities of NORAD and redirect interceptors away from the east coast and merely exploited this exercise?


From Shadowherder (emphasis mine):

This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers' screens as part of the war game exercises.


So where is the evidence that any military operation imposed false readings into civilian ATC radars?



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


I would say between "allowed to happen" and "ran the whole thing" "ran the whole thing" is the more likely scenario. We already know who the handler of alquaeda is, MPRI.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



We already know who the handler of alquaeda is, MPRI.


No wait - we "know" this? A few posts ago you pretended that you never even heard of them and now we evolved to the point where we "know" that they handled (whatever that means) Al Quaeda????? Wow, that was quick.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 





So please post some evidence that the military installed false images on the radar screens of civilian ATC.


As you know, that is just another empty assertion.

You won't ever receive that evidence, that *proof*. Problem for those who make up these stories, and write them here and elsewhere, is that there are recordings of the radar information made, at all FAA facilities. Most of those aren't kept, of course. Unless there's an incident of some sort, then they can be reviewed later as part of the investigation.

Any such "tampering" would therefore be clearly shown, in those recordings, and would have been known about factually, long ago. Many people would have been aware, and there is no way they all would be "silenced". Just another fantasy scenario from the fertile, imaginative minds of those who spend their lives making stuff like this up.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 



As you know, that is just another empty assertion. You won't ever receive that evidence, that *proof*.


Thank you for the response. I am sure you are correct. I am just curious to see what the next tactic shall be. I am betting on - ignore the question and hope it goes away so that the same claim can be made a couple of posts down the road.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Cassius666
 



We already know who the handler of alquaeda is, MPRI.


No wait - we "know" this? A few posts ago you pretended that you never even heard of them and now we evolved to the point where we "know" that they handled (whatever that means) Al Quaeda????? Wow, that was quick.


Yes gramps. I had questions and now I have answers. Information travels fast in this modern age.


Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ProudBird
 



As you know, that is just another empty assertion. You won't ever receive that evidence, that *proof*.


Thank you for the response. I am sure you are correct. I am just curious to see what the next tactic shall be. I am betting on - ignore the question and hope it goes away so that the same claim can be made a couple of posts down the road.


I guess its up to you what you are willing to accept for evidence. If the testimony of the American military who was on the job that day is not good enough for hooper, then its not good enough for hooper.
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

What indicates that there were false radar blips on the radars of air traffic controllers? You think the military places false blips on the radar screens of civilian atc?




Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Here is the video in question

" We fought many phantoms that day... we received many calls about planes that turned out to be phantoms."

Remember Hooper? You got your but handed to you yet again..... Why do you even bother?


Your quote says calls. Calls are not blips on radar screens.

How is it going with those inverted aircraft force vectors, any progress ?

And stop trying to put your hands on hoopers but.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 


Seriously? Why do you think they got those calls? Did somebody scan with his telescope? They used radar.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by hooper
 


Your evidence is right there in the video. The "exercise" that jammed the surveillance for NORAD was not terminated until after the attacks.

But if it wasnt an inside job, who jammed the surveillance of NORAD? Did Alquaeda gain knowledge of the date and time of the exercise an exercise that would jam the surveilance capabilities of NORAD and redirect interceptors away from the east coast and merely exploited this exercise?
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


I know one company that had control of said software. Ptech. Research ptech 911
edit on 14-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by hooper

What indicates that there were false radar blips on the radars of air traffic controllers? You think the military places false blips on the radar screens of civilian atc?




Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Here is the video in question

" We fought many phantoms that day... we received many calls about planes that turned out to be phantoms."

Remember Hooper? You got your but handed to you yet again..... Why do you even bother?


Your quote says calls. Calls are not blips on radar screens.

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by waypastvne
 


Seriously? Why do you think they got those calls? Did somebody scan with his telescope? They used radar.


Waypast is having a hard time comprehending simple things. Give him a break. We are all different. But true. There were multiple live fly hijacking going on that day which were on radar as well as phantoms. (fake blips_



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by Cassius666
reply to post by hooper
 


Your evidence is right there in the video. The "exercise" that jammed the surveillance for NORAD was not terminated until after the attacks.

But if it wasnt an inside job, who jammed the surveillance of NORAD? Did Alquaeda gain knowledge of the date and time of the exercise an exercise that would jam the surveilance capabilities of NORAD and redirect interceptors away from the east coast and merely exploited this exercise?
edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)


I know one company that had control of said software. Ptech. Research ptech 911
edit on 14-10-2011 by Shadow Herder because: (no reason given)


I heard about PTECH. Allegedly they were involved with installing backdoors in systems sensitive to the defense. But for what purpose? The exercises were planned and scheduled, so data didnt need to be slipped in "covertly" unless you need to keep control of the system to make sure the exercise and input of fake data isnt terminated until after the attack.

Also here is more information on the topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on 14-10-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



If the testimony of the American military who was on the job that day is not good enough for hooper, then its not good enough for hooper


So please show me a quote from the US military wherein it is stated that the military imposed false images on the radar equipment of American civilian ATC operators. That is the assertion - where is the evidence that proves the assertion, not the assumption, the direct evidence.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 



Yes gramps. I had questions and now I have answers.

Wow, thats it? Thats the end of the line? One post and ten responses later you now are certain about the information? Fastest case of confirmation bias in US history.

Information travels fast in this modern age.

So does B.S.






top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join