9/11 Intercepted

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
Two pages of....nothing.

What do skeptics here object to specifically about the content of the video. Remember. Specifically

The spooky music. Why the spooky music? Also the contention that America's air defenses were ineffective. America's air defenses were not designed to pick out hostile vs. friendly civilian aircraft with the only difference being who was at the controls at any given moment.

So the air defence was effective. Okay gotcha. Pure luck that there were "exercises" going on that day, huh?

www.historycommons.org...
"Before 9:36 a.m. September 11, 2001: Officials Claim NORAD Is Monitoring Flight 93

According to one account given by NEADS Commander Robert Marr, some time before around 9:36 when it changes direction, while it is still flying west, Flight 93 is being monitored by NEADS. Marr describes how, “We don’t have fighters that way and we think [Flight 93 is] headed toward Detroit or Chicago.” He says he contacts a base in the area “so they [can] head off 93 at the pass.” Not only does NORAD know about the flight, but also, according to NORAD Commander Larry Arnold, “We watched the 93 track as it meandered around the Ohio-Pennsylvania area and started to turn south toward DC.” (This change of direction occurs around 9:36 a.m.) [Filson, 2003] This account completely contradicts the 9/11 Commission’s later claim that NEADS is first notified about Flight 93 at 10:07 a.m. [9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004]"

There's a major difference between allegedly not being prepared for this scenario and purposely making the job impossible and/or sitting watching the events unfold with their thumbs up their asses. Why were fighter jets sent out over the Atlantic? Why were fighter jets stalled on the runway? How can you say with a straight face that four allegedly hijacked and identified airliners left roaming he skies for over an hour over militarized zones weren't "ineffective"?

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
More lies. Prove that the RADES data has been "altered"

Never said the RADES data was "altered". I said the P4T cartoon screen capture of the RADES data is altered. Not for me to prove one way or the other. I'm not introducing a cartoon as evidence of anything.

Now, are you finished with your childish games which only go to show that 6 years ago I was foolish enough to listen to P4T and CIT? Is there anything specific in the cartoon you are trying to promote, or did you just post the video out of curiosity?

Oh, but if you want "proof" that the 84 RADES screen shots are altered, then download the data and RS3 software and look at it for yourself. Don't look to me (you would not believe me anyways) to show you, educate yourself and stop being led around by P4T or anyone else for that matter.

911datasets

But, just to clarify, the NEADS data is "altered" from norm. I was 100% right about that.



Keep in mind, that is NEADS radar data, not 84 RADES. The SEADS data was fine. It was Dennis Cimino of P4T who told me it was due to target insertion. However, when I decided to stop listening to P4T and approached two independent PhD types in electrical engineering, they told me a different story. They said it "could be a number of things related to processor architecture including multiprocessor issues”. So, I went to the source:

Jeff Richardson, email dated November 19, 2008 11:14 AM

“Raw radar data does not have time associated with it. The radar data is assumed to be real-time (or near real-time) upon input into the military command and control systems and/or the FAA ATC systems. The 84 RADES data recorders time stamp the data as the data is recorded at the ADSs [Air Defense Sectors]. I'm not sure what our timing source was in 2001 (NTP, GPS, or ?) but a precise timing method was used to periodically update our recorders and keep them time synched. There evidently was problem with the way our NEADS recorder time was being updated as seen in the 25 second late timing during the 911 event. Without periodic time updates, our data recorders internal time it used which we found can drift considerably. Since 911 we have changed the architecture of our recorders to prevent the time drift.”

Darn, they tell me the same thing the PhD's did. So the "alteration" is to the time stamp, not the raw data (as evidenced by the SEADS data). So instead of being "proof" of false signal generation as I was told by the P4T "experts", it was simply a case of a bad microprocessor clock that was generating the time stamp for NEADS. So yes, "altered", but not a nefarious alteration.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer

So the air defence was effective. Okay gotcha.

Well - were any American targets struct by military aircraft that day? No. There is not now and never has been an impenetrable bubble of a defense network over the US.

Pure luck that there were "exercises" going on that day, huh?

Nope, there are military exercises going on every day of the year somewhere by one branch of the military or another. That's what they do. They are either at war or preparing for war. Thats there job.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer

.....militarized zones....

I am not aware of these "militarized zones" in the US. Please document.

Originally posted by 911files

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
More lies. Prove that the RADES data has been "altered"

Never said the RADES data was "altered". I said the P4T cartoon screen capture of the RADES data is altered. Not for me to prove one way or the other. I'm not introducing a cartoon as evidence of anything.

*SNIP*

Oh, but if you want "proof" that the 84 RADES screen shots are altered, then download the data and RS3 software and look at it for yourself. Don't look to me (you would not believe me anyways) to show you, educate yourself and stop being led around by P4T or anyone else for that matter.

911datasets

Specifically which screen capture has been "altered"? At which time marker in the film specifically?

AFAIK the only thing "altered" is the color of the tracks from default so people can see it easier.

Educate us.

reply to post by hooper


My post stands. I'm not going to repeat myself.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Are you trying to tell me that the command chain and pilots were so out of he loop that they were unaware of the FAA requests for assistance and that when help was eventually launched, they adhered to normal protocol like wind-up toys?

Or that the Langley fighters sitting on the runway for nearly 20 minutes, and those within the base watching events unfold on TV were just as wrapped up in this cocoon of ignorance? New York attacked? Suspicious aircraft heading towards Washington? "Quick, get off over da Atlantic!"

Read the link I gave. At least read the quote on "Flight 93".

And please provide a link to where exercises which left US airspace defenceless are a normal occurence.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer

Are you trying to tell me that the command chain and pilots were so out of he loop that they were unaware of the FAA requests for assistance and that when help was eventually launched, they adhered to normal protocol like wind-up toys?

Yep. That protocol is there for a reason. No reason to train and design missions if everyone is just going to jump up and do whatever they want.

Or that the Langley fighters sitting on the runway for nearly 20 minutes, and those within the base watching events unfold on TV were just as wrapped up in this cocoon of ignorance? New York attacked? Suspicious aircraft heading towards Washington? "Quick, get off over da Atlantic!"

Oh there you go again with the "nearly" and "almost".

Read the link I gave. At least read the quote on "Flight 93".

Nope. You want people hear to read it then post it here.

And please provide a link to where exercises which left US airspace defenceless are a normal occurence.

You first. Please document that US airspace was "defenceless". Your hyperbole is not my reality.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
I've tried to post this twice now and keeps disappearing. Or am I doing something wrong?

Mod Note: 15k.) Video links/embeds: You will not embed or Post a link to a video without a reasonable description of its content and why it interests you, is germane to the topics discussed on the Websites or the topic of an existing thread should you post it in a reply to an existing thread.

edit on 20-7-2012 by Gemwolf because: Left note and removed all caps title

You're doing nothing wrong at all, I just think they don't want anyone posting this video here because it reveals that planes were picked up on radar after they supposedly crashed. That kind of info is not something they want being made public.

Anyone knocking pilots for truth is doing so because they know pilots for truth speak the truth, and they are a threat to the official story. If anyone tries to say anything bad about PFT then those people are not to be trusted.