Ex-CIA Pilot - No Planes Hit The Twin Towers


Status
Not open for further replies.
1. Why would terrorists deny an act they commited? It's not a question of did the US attack their own citizens, it's a question of why was it allowed to happen - there are documents/reports that link the Saudi government to this, at the time Bush was quite pally with them. Why was more not made of the Saudi link?

2. So they could implement such measures as the patriot act? The reason Al Qaeda attacked us, according to some, is because they're jealous of our freedoms. It wasn't the al qeada upset with our freedom, it was the American government. I dont for one minute think they were faked, I'd argue there was a series of incompetent decisions which allowed the attack, development of the attack.

That's just my opinion like.

The victims families are trying to have these documents declassified as we speak.
http://nypost.com/2014/03/08/victim-families-release-secret-saudi-911-report/
 
About flight93's disappearance. I watched an aircraft investigation episode with a similar argument as the result of similar circumstances; where had the plane gone?

They ruled that the speed and angle of attack resulted in the lack of wreckage etc. - the earth had effectively swallowed the plain.[DOUBLEPOST=1394652926][/DOUBLEPOST]
The victims families are trying to have these documents declassified as we speak.
http://nypost.com/2014/03/08/victim-families-release-secret-saudi-911-report/

I was aware mate. It shocks me, after the NSA bollocks, that people believe those that govern us. Didn't they categorically state they didn't monitor Merkel, under oath?
 
I
About flight93's disappearance. I watched an aircraft investigation episode with a similar argument as the result of similar circumstances; where had the plane gone?

They ruled that the speed and angle of attack resulted in the lack of wreckage etc. - the earth had effectively swallowed the plain.[DOUBLEPOST=1394652926][/DOUBLEPOST]

I was aware mate. It shocks me, after the NSA bollocks, that people believe those that govern us. Didn't they categorically state they didn't monitor Merkel, under oath?[/

I'm not sure if it was under oath or not to be honest but I wouldn't be surprised!
[DOUBLEPOST=1394654321][/DOUBLEPOST]
About flight93's disappearance. I watched an aircraft investigation episode with a similar argument as the result of similar circumstances; where had the plane gone?

They ruled that the speed and angle of attack resulted in the lack of wreckage etc. - the earth had effectively swallowed the plain.[DOUBLEPOST=1394652926][/DOUBLEPOST]

I was aware mate. It shocks me, after the NSA bollocks, that people believe those that govern us. Didn't they categorically state they didn't monitor Merkel, under oath?

Sorry made a hash there, I'm not sure but wouldn't be surprised.
 
Just because you can't believe it, doesn't mean it's not true. You have to consider the level of threat and response time they plan for. There may still have been some bombers on that level of stand by as a hangover from the Cold War, but interceptors? they would have hours of notice. You don't just strap half a dozen sidewinders on and press the big green 'fly now' button. Arming and fuelling takes time, then you've got to generate tanker support for your interceptors so they can stay on station for longer. you've also got to consider that even had they launched immediately they would have been belting all over the country in order to get there just too late. Military aircraft don't fly armed as a matter of routine, because of the potential for accidents.

The same thing could happen tomorrow and the level of respopnse would be similar is the uncomfortable truth. It's just not feasible to do unless you have an interceptor sitting on the runway at all times in the city, and even then it's a long shot because of the time it takes to verify whether a suspicious aircraft has just lost comms, has committed a gross navigational error, or there's something more sinister going on. You get into the cockpit over London and you'll have hit your target long before any Typhoons get there, probably before anyone realises you've even done it.

There had been 67 successful intercepts of passenger planes previously that year, in one day with 4 rouge planes in the air and NORAD on high alert not one got intercepted. Just a coincidence, you're right of curse!
 
There had been 67 successful intercepts of passenger planes previously that year, in one day with 4 rouge planes in the air and NORAD on high alert not one got intercepted. Just a coincidence, you're right of curse!
What sort of passenger planes had been intercepted?
 
ALL the ones that had veered off course or lost transponder contact in the past ten months! Watch stuff(that contains 'facts' verified by your beloved 'official report', it's just that scientists are picking holes and inconsistencies in it, you know, like a proper scientific/forensic validation of given information :/)
 
ALL the ones that had veered off course or lost transponder contact in the past ten months! Watch stuff(that contains 'facts' verified by your beloved 'official report', it's just that scientists are picking holes and inconsistencies in it, you know, like a proper scientific/forensic validation of given information :/)
Well that wasn't very informative/useful a reply, so how about a linkie please, so I can find out for myself?
 
I wish conspiracy theorists would band together. Last video I saw using that helicopter footage of the second tower strike said the plane was faked because there was NOTHING in the live feed. Now this guy says in the live feed there's a 'ball' and by the time the evening footage comes around, plane edited in at the wrong angle.

Mind you, the bit about the difference between the live shot and evening bulliten shot did seem strange. As in it did look like the same camera shot and angle, just with a filter on it and the background on and a clearer plane image.
 
There had been 67 successful intercepts of passenger planes previously that year, in one day with 4 rouge planes in the air and NORAD on high alert not one got intercepted. Just a coincidence, you're right of curse!

All under identical circumstances to 9/11? No. Most will have been on airways or entering the FIR a hundred miles to the east or west of the continental US, as they nearly always are in my extensive experience, and no immediate threat to anyone. It is still nigh on impossible to intercept an aircraft taken directly over its target, there's just not enough time to get there.

This is my primary job, which I've been doing for many years, but you're more than welcome to believe a few spotty kids and some blokes with completely non-related degrees on youtube if you really want to. No skin off my nose. You run with the History Of Art or Biology fella, or the lad whose answer to any sensible explanation is 'well they would say that wouldn't they', they clearly know all about it.
[DOUBLEPOST=1394738380][/DOUBLEPOST]
ALL the ones that had veered off course or lost transponder contact in the past ten months! Watch stuff(that contains 'facts' verified by your beloved 'official report', it's just that scientists are picking holes and inconsistencies in it, you know, like a proper scientific/forensic validation of given information :/)

They don't intercept everything. A lot of the time contact is re-established before the aircraft launch.

There was one this morning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
real planes hit the holograms of the towers. which is a reveral of 2001
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top