I found this and it does make a good amount of sense... and, it raises some very serious doubts.
The source story is about a year or so old, but it's still thought provoking because there is research behind this, not just speculation. It later goes into the "No planes" theory (Which I don't personally buy, and I'm not espousing the theory by any means), but the beginning is very thought provoking.
Link:
Manufactured Terrorism: The Truth About Sept 11th
Quote:
The incriminating anomaly in this timeline is that the US air force did not scramble a single fighter jet to intercept any of the hijacked planes.
A little research into aviation regulations and historical precedent demonstrates that every one of those planes should have been intercepted by jet fighters before it got anywhere near its crash destination. The failure to launch any intercepts is only explainable by a systematic nation-wide stand down of routine air defence procedures. FAA regulations state that if any plane deviates from its flight path, and fails to respond to ATC commands or communications, it is automatically declared an emergency. This is because is it has become a hazard to other planes - even if no malicious intent is suspected. If ATC is any doubt as to whether an emergency exists, it is to be considered as one.
Once ATC has detected an emergency, a request is put through to NORAD for an escort of fighter jets to intercept the plane, investigate the problem, and guide it back to its correct course, via a set of clearly stated procedures. Should the pilot prove unco-operative, the regulations provide the fighter pilots with a graduated range of more aggressive responses, such as firing warning tracers, flying one each side, to force it into the desired flight path - or even shooting down in extreme circumstances. The fighter jets are either scrambled from nearby air bases or else by diverting pilots on training flights to the intercept. It takes only a few minutes to scramble fighter jets, and the process is so routine that in the year leading up to Sept 11, there was an average of 1.6 such incidents weekly across the US. A study of the location of air bases in relation to the flight paths of the hijacked planes, indicates that every plane should have been intercepted before impact. And yet nothing was even scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
WTF? No planes, but missiles. This guy was high or drunk when he wrote this.
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
When the first deviated, ATC should have declared an emergency. It is not feasible for EVERY single aircraft in the air to instantaneously land so while ATC is trying to land a few thousand aircraft, ground all upcoming flights, divert all incoming flights and get norad to scramble, other deviations weren't noticed. When the first plane hit the tower, ALL flights were then deviant.
The course of action to not intercept was the best COA. Why shoot down the wrong plane?
This is common sense chaos. The theory is flawed.
KevinP (The IOU One IDB) wrote:When the first deviated, ATC should have declared an emergency. It is not feasible for EVERY single aircraft in the air to instantaneously land so while ATC is trying to land a few thousand aircraft, ground all upcoming flights, divert all incoming flights and get norad to scramble, other deviations weren't noticed. When the first plane hit the tower, ALL flights were then deviant.
The course of action to not intercept was the best COA. Why shoot down the wrong plane?
This is common sense chaos. The theory is flawed.
Of course there would be a number of things that would happen before they would shoot down the plane, I think the main point here is that the fighter jets didn't even intercept which by the definition givin in the last statement would have been to fly along side the plane and attempt contacting it and so on. That aside if you wanna hear a REALLY good spin on this "Consiracy Theory" I encourage ALL of you Americans to watch this video and comment after viewing it.
Click here to watch video
03z24
Quote:
American Airlines flight 11, a Boeing 767, tail number N334AA, with 92 people aboard, including the hijackers, was hijacked by 5 Arabs, while on route from Boston to LA. It was known to be hijacked by 8.25 AM or earlier, and hit the Nth tower of the WTC at 8.46.
Quote:
United Airlines flight 175, a Boeing 767, tail number N612UA, with 65 aboard , including the hijackers , was hijacked by 5 Arabs, while flying the same route as AA 11. It was known to be hijacked at about 8.55 AM and hit the Sth Tower of the WTC at 9.03.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/110903usafbases.html
Quote:
Also, there is an Air Defense Intercept Zone just off shore for the entire Atlantic Coast. This zone is constantly being patrolled. In general fast movers would not need to be scrambled. They can be diverted from routine patrol and training flights for the intercept. The odds are that on a beautiful blue morning in September many flights would be on patrol just off shore. It would be most improbable that even one commercial flight could go more than fifteen minutes without being intercepted.
Source: http://www.af.mil/sites/alphabetical.shtml#a
It doesn't take a Krescan to figure out that if the plane was known to be hijacked 8:25, it deviated a good bit beforehand. It takes roughly what... 3-5 minutes to spin up an F15E that is on standby (in the prison planet link, 108th fighter wing in swanton OH spun up F16's that weren't on alert in 16 minutes)? Figure 20 to get to the aircraft that has deviated... that's still 5 mins to assess, order compliance and if necessary, shoot down the aircraft. At that point, every other aircraft is already either on alert or up in the air.
At this point you have a frying-pan/fire choice: frying pan, they're incompetant (not the pilots, the FAA), or pan: they were deliberately not doing anything.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
^^^ That's old news. If you watch the extra footage, the guy basically says that Muslims don't understand science....A VERY credible source.
/sarcasm
And as for a USAF sortie, I doubt that could happen in the amount of time before the pentagon was hit. The article says that training flights would be diverted. Wrong. They would be low on fuel, or probably nearly empty, and would definitely be unarmed. Secondly, it takes much longer than a few minutes to sortie, let's say, an F-15E. It has to be fueled, armed, pre-flight, the pilot has to be briefed, launch, etc.
The Defenses at NORAD are mainly aimed for an ICBM or Missile attack. Of course they wouldn't be able to scramble in time. A Tactical SATCOM Satellite Link from East Coast to Mountain and back to East Coast alone would take 4 hours to set up.
There is a standing patrol of the atlantic approach zone.
There are about 7-8 jets aloft to patrol that area every day, all day. They are there (and have been since the 70's) for the explicit purpose of patrolling for, assisting and if need be, reigning in wayward aircraft. They are all armed with heatseeking missiles (Sidewinders IIRC, I wouldn't see the point in going with more) in case the worst happens.
The whole idea of having aircraft on standby is that they are fuelled, armed, armed up and ready to go
Romeo Foxtrot November (or Right F**king NOW!) and recieve instructions and flight plans in flight. These are in addition to the aircraft that are supposed to be patrolling the North Atlantic Approach Zone.
NORAD was responsible for running training flights elsewhere in the US and Canada if you paid attention, and the authority for ordering aircraft patrolling the approach zone is the FAA.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
BTW, because it takes for-bloody-ever to set up a satellite link to Cheyenne, the Pentagon and Whitehouse use multiple redundant lines of communication. ie: there's no point where they're waiting to talk, the line never goes dead...
We HAVE had fibre-optic lines for the last dozen years or so as the carrier for most digital transmissions
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
KevinP (The IOU One IDB) wrote:^^^ That's old news. If you watch the extra footage, the guy basically says that Muslims don't understand science....A VERY credible source.
/sarcasm
I hope your not refering to the video
03z24
Average 1.6 intercepts per week.. Nothing on 9/11...
hmmm... Doesn't take a genius to see something was at play here.
PAX
^^^ What I'm trying to say.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Those lines you were talking about are they Red, or Black? Which plane in all thousand that are then off course is the one we are to escort? How long does it take an F-15/16 to get from Charelston SC to Manhattan or the Center of D.C.? And THEN, find one aircraft in a few hundred? How long have you been in the USAF? Get what I'm saying? Despite what you think, there are things that you don't know.
And Yes, I was referring to the Loose Change Video. Moreso the extra footage for it where they screen it to a NY audience. Listen closely to the narrator when he's talking to the fat girl on the steps. He, in not so many words, says that a bunch of muslims don't understand science and tactics.
KevinP (The IOU One IDB) wrote:Those lines you were talking about are they Red, or Black? Which plane in all thousand that are then off course is the one we are to escort? How long does it take an F-15/16 to get from Charelston SC to Manhattan or the Center of D.C.? And THEN, find one aircraft in a few hundred? How long have you been in the USAF? Get what I'm saying? Despite what you think, there are things that you don't know.
Funny, they seem to be able to do it every other time. Why would they suddenly lose the ability to something that is totally routine to them? You don't need to be in the airforce to know that if an exercise has been done hundreds of times before, it can be done again. The fighters and the pilots are on standby 24/7, and as they explained, they can be in the air in just a couple minutes. Finding the target is not hard, the FAA radar system would have identified the errant craft before the scramble and it would be showing up on every single TACAS system in the air, including the airforces'.
I may not have been in the airforce but I know commercial pilots and I have a best buddy that was an air traffic controller. I have used the SATCOM system (simulated Air Traffic Control) as well as using simulated flight computers as the commecial airlines carry. The system can issue a series of linked alerts to every craft in the sky. It's easy to find an individual aircraft with that system.
Ask yourself this. Who had the three requirements?
Means.
Motive,
and Opportunity.
PAX
Where are you getting this 1.6 intercepts per week crap from? According to the FAA the only time a civilian plane was ever intercepted in open air space was when the private jet of the sports guy went out of contact. And then it took F 18 over an hour to reach it. Why so long? Simple prior to 9/11 NO jet over the continental US was allowed to go super sonic. Only off the shore where the sonic boom wouldn't interfer with anyone on land. Those intercepts they are taling about could be from only over restricted air space
like Camp David in Md. and military bases other then that in the pre 9/11 world you could fly anywhere you wanted. Now takeing into account that even if a plane did come up as hi-jacked the FAA had no way to tell the Air Force out side of picking up a regular phone and makeing a call. From there they would be transfered all over the place before they could even tell anyone in the Air Force anything at all ! Then they would have to scramble the jets and where they can be air borne a very short time they had a speed limit to obey ! This is yet another load of crap that if the author actualy knew what the hell he was talking about he would know just how wrong he is. Gam I'm surprised YOU of all people falling for something of this nature.
Hey if anyones interested I have a nice bridge I'm selling real cheap. Just PM me and I'll give you all the details.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
NORAD monitors FAA radar. The FAA doesn't have to tell them, they already know.
More than that.. Don't give me that crap that there is no direct communication.. Think about it. The people responsible for North American Air defence have no link to the people who control all civian traffic over North America. Ha ha ha LOL you are one funny guy. People might be stupid, but they're not THAT stupid.
Military controllers need acess to FAA radar in order to keep their own flights out of harms way.
True the airforce cannot go supersonic over land.. Doesn't matter, they don't have to. The fastest commercial jets (aside from the 2 supersonic models, one of which is grounded and the other only flies over eastern Europe) go Mach .89.. Maybe Mach .91 with a tail wind. So a jet can catch them from behind if needed.. Then again, anyone setting up and intercept doesn't start from behind the target do they?
How stupid do you think we are? You are nothing more than a Re-bunker. How much do they pay you?
PAX
OH GOOD GREIF! HAHA, first off NORAD used to watch the skies outward from the coastal US not inward! And NORAD has nothing to do with the FAA they are two seperate agencies completey! Now they can but prior to 9/11 nope they couldn't. Sure its stupid but hey remember your talking about big govt. the very definition of stupid.
Now as for the whole plane being intercepted non-sence lets look at it shall we. When the planes first said they were hi-jacked the hi-jackers turned off the planes transponder so air traffic controll couldn't tell who was who. So they have to start ruleing out which plane is which over the busiest air traffic hub in the country. No small task, so even if they could have figured out which plane was the hi-jacked ones then the Air-Force would have had to have had fighter planes directly in the path of the hi-jacked planes in order to intercept them. Well last I heard the hi-jackers didn't file a flight plan with the FAA before they took control of the planes. So where are they heading next? Now figure you have 4 missing planes in the busiest air traffic area in the country and no way to tell them apart or where they are headed so what do you tell the Air-Force? And if your the Air-Force what fighters do you dispatch and from where? How can you intercept something you can't pin point right away and don't know where they are headed? You'd have to chase them down as interception wouldn't be an option and as you your self said they are flying at mach .89 to mach .91 so that leaves your fighter jet a whole mach .11 at most to catch them. Thats not that much so it won't happen quick.
Sorry but this whole story by the above author is just that, a story. One I may add makes as much sence as any of the Mother Goose nursery ryhmes. Sure they may sound good on the surface but as soon as you actualy look and think about it theres no way an old lady ever could live in a shoe. And Humpy Dumpy is not real.
As for who I work for thats easy I work for Miller Brother Chevrolet in Ellicott City MD.
Feel free to call and ask for me my ext. is 3002.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jackalope wrote:OH GOOD GREIF! HAHA, first off NORAD used to watch the skies outward from the coastal US not inward! And NORAD has nothing to do with the FAA they are two seperate agencies completey! Now they can but prior to 9/11 nope they couldn't. Sure its stupid but hey remember your talking about big govt. the very definition of stupid.
Now as for the whole plane being intercepted non-sence lets look at it shall we. When the planes first said they were hi-jacked the hi-jackers turned off the planes transponder so air traffic controll couldn't tell who was who. So they have to start ruleing out which plane is which over the busiest air traffic hub in the country. No small task, so even if they could have figured out which plane was the hi-jacked ones then the Air-Force would have had to have had fighter planes directly in the path of the hi-jacked planes in order to intercept them. Well last I heard the hi-jackers didn't file a flight plan with the FAA before they took control of the planes. So where are they heading next? Now figure you have 4 missing planes in the busiest air traffic area in the country and no way to tell them apart or where they are headed so what do you tell the Air-Force? And if your the Air-Force what fighters do you dispatch and from where? How can you intercept something you can't pin point right away and don't know where they are headed? You'd have to chase them down as interception wouldn't be an option and as you your self said they are flying at mach .89 to mach .91 so that leaves your fighter jet a whole mach .11 at most to catch them. Thats not that much so it won't happen quick.
Sorry but this whole story by the above author is just that, a story. One I may add makes as much sence as any of the Mother Goose nursery ryhmes. Sure they may sound good on the surface but as soon as you actualy look and think about it theres no way an old lady ever could live in a shoe. And Humpy Dumpy is not real.
As for who I work for thats easy I work for Miller Brother Chevrolet in Ellicott City MD.
Feel free to call and ask for me my ext. is 3002.
First off, nobody has to sort out jack.. They would know immediately which blip had no transponder. It's easy. If you saw their radar screens You see just how easy.. Very, very simple. It's the blip without a number. Any one controller never has more than about 10 blips to track as well. So don't gimme that crap.. It's crap. I've seen the radar.
Yes, NORAD and the FAA are totally different organizations, but NORAD has all military control radar and FAA radar to ensure safety regarding military flights. The FAA has no access to military control so it is (as has been for years) up to NORAD to ensure there are no collisions. Yes, NORAD looks outward, but they also monitor domestic traffic. They are not the Distant Early warning ONLY bunch, they are the North American Air Defense command. That would be all airspace over AND around North America.
Busiest hub in the country is Chicago with LAX being 2nd. NYC isn't it. One aircraft every 2 minutes in New York.. Chicago handles 1 plane every 1 minute on 2 runways. LAX is similar but has larger periods of inactivity.
Again, knowing which planes and their vectors is easy.. That argument is moot.
They are on radar, they have speed, altitude and direction. They no longer have a flight plan. All other info would still be in the system, including number aboard, fuel load, and aircraft type. The only thing lost by turning off the transponder would be flight plan. You then dispatch from a forward airbase with intercept vectors. The Military craft would also have radar and would identify the stray before they even left the tarmac. They would be identified as unknowns in a sea of knowns. Easy marks really.
Funny, even the tiniest little private plane get's picked up by control the second they lift off. A plane can switch from IFR rules to VFR rules whhile in flight, be assigned a transponder frequency, file a flight plan and carry on without any problem. It can all be done through their flight computer with just a few key presses.
Air traffic control is done in a very, very effiecient and effective manner.
You seem to have little to no experience with these systems. It is not chaos in the sky, it is in fact very controlled.
Not only would local radar be following the planes, so would the regional radar and the controllers at "center".
Don't believe me? Talk to either a pilot or a controller.
PAX
KevinP (The IOU One IDB) wrote:Those lines you were talking about are they Red, or Black? Which plane in all thousand that are then off course is the one we are to escort? How long does it take an F-15/16 to get from Charelston SC to Manhattan or the Center of D.C.? And THEN, find one aircraft in a few hundred? How long have you been in the USAF? Get what I'm saying? Despite what you think, there are things that you don't know.
Doesn't matter the colour.. What's the point of having communications if they're not instantly available? You seem to think you know about the communication network, yet, the first idea you profer is that you'd need satellite coms... If it takes 4 hours to to set up a link, and 4 seconds to setup a link using secure Fibre, which do you think the average idiot would use?
Anyhow...
FAA and Norad are able to co-ordinate instantaneously (Jack: NORAD scans 100% of the sky, when I get home, I'll post a couple of instances where they were unable to identify launches WITHIN the USA of home-built rockets and almost bombed the hell out of Americans) because of shared information. I mean, seriously, there was the ability to LIVE TRACK every civillian flight in 1998 online. Do not, for a second, tell me that the information was not available. Pardon the Pun, it won't fly.
Kevin: See above: any flight not using a transponder would show up on an interdictor's radar as well as on civillian radar... If you're familliar with the AF, then you'd know there are about 35 AFB's in the area, each with it's own radar, as well as civillian radar that covers the approach corridor and travel lanes. If you noticed in the video, it also looks INCREDIBLY suspect that the flight out of boston-la pulled 180deg turn.
I also find it funny: you're ignoring everything that was said in the video as bunk because of one piece of speculation... Listen to what the guy said at face value before you start condemning at veilled racism.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
They are both filling the role of Re-bunker and I am curious which agency is footing the bill. That might help us figure out what really happened
PAX
Yes they do now but they didn't used to. And I never said hub the correct word I was looking for was corridor. And if you've ever seen the mess they have to look at and deal with you'd see what I'm talking about. I suggest you all go watch the history and Discovery channels to learn why this is all a load of crap. I do however find it interresting how any of you can believe any of this crap as true. Do you believe in aliens? How about UFO's? if those things can't be believed because noone has any proof then why is it you all buy into ever con spir theroy that comes down the pike? Then when your shown a plausible explanation you seem to get upset almost seem threatened when your shown what you claim is not possible.
Its good to question things but when you get to this level of paranoia its not healthy. You may want to talk to someone and see about getting some help. You seem a bit confused.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
I have seen the radar. I know exactly what's going on. TV likes to show the whole picture. The thing is, no singal controller ever has to deal with the whole picture.
I know how the systems work. I was certified on SATCOM as a controller. My friend is a Transport Canada certified controller. Two of my friends are private pilots and another is a commercial pilot. I have been in the tower and in the aircraft dealing with the actual systems.
Maybe you should watch a little less TV and listen to the people who actually deal with the stuff everyday.
You seem to think NORAD is an American organization.. First mistake.
You seem to think the NORAD systems were just linked with the FAA's, but of course that is far from true as well. They have been linked ever since it was possible. Once again, that was done so that military controllers could keep their traffic away from civilian traffic. This is not new. Noit even close to new.
You also seem to think that NORAD only looks outward, that is plain silly.
You are wrong about soo much and yet you think you should tell us what to believe. Not anything you say, you just make it up as you go.
Aliens and crap is diversionary, it won't work. Just because you cannot put forward a valid arguement you try to defame and distract. Another NSA / CIA tactic.. WHO IS PAYING YOU? Honestly, you work just like they do.. Can't tell the truth, so let's make up a lie so rediculas that the entire argument is garbage. Won't work with me buddy, c'mon back down to Earth will ya?
This is not some out of control paranoia, it's valid question that deserve answers.
PAX
PS: Agian it comes back to the only thing that matters.
Who had the means
Who had the motive
who had the opportunity
( SHAKES HEAD IN UTTER DISBELIEF ) Wow I never realized you were such an expert on the defence systems of the nation HAHA thats cool ! And they let you openly discuse the inner workings of NORAD and the FCC on here ? WOW !
Look I'm not telling you to believe me at all, I could care less if you do or you don't seeing how weather you has zero berring on me at all. I just find it funny how you guys, who by all rights seem bright enough, fall for all this stuff all the time. The author has NO PROOF only wild acusations and you guys go "Hmm I guess hes right" Let me ask you why is he right? What has he shown that you would believe him? I'm not trying to start with you really I'm not so please don't take it that way I'm just trying to follow the logic in how is this believable? None of it can be prooved and your demanding proof. Then when I offer what is the "official version" you say I don't know what I'm talking about
but on the flip side YOU don't know any more then I do so in essence your saying your clueless as well and then argueing as to just how clueless we both are!!!
Look all I'm asking for is some proof. Some shread of hard evidence to back up these wild claims any made by the author. I'm not even gonna get into the NORAD and FAA stuff anymore as its been all over that NORAD was an outward looking radar system and that they never looked inward. If you wish to argue this then by all means contact all the news channels and let them know how you know better.
But please all I ask is for some proof. Not someones theroy but actual hold up in court proof that was covered up and lyed about as to 9 / 11 but so far I've not heard any at all.
Because if anyone HAD any proof then the official story would have to be fixed. But untill it is fixed then its fairly clear no such proof exists.
Now if you'll excuse me I have to see a man about a bridge.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
You seem to miss the point that I have been inside a control tower and have trained on the SATCOM system. SATCOM is a simulation of the actual control using the actual radar but the inputs are not connected to the system.. That way the trainee cannot cause a problem but can see what is actually happening.
The FAA has no secrets. No I have not been in a NORAD facility but (first it is North Amercan Air defence, not the defence of any one nation, it is a joint operation) I do know that they respond to unauthorized flights all the time. They DO monitor civilian radar, as they should.
Linked above are articles that interview pilots that are on standby, they explain how it works. Did you bother to read everything? No, or you would not be saying what you did just now.
You have not offered any official story, just speculation based on what you saw on Discovery. Gimme a break.. Those are the same people that said kerosine burns hot enough to melt steel.. Funny how all those old kerosine engines just keep on running.. Anyway.. The point is that I do have some first hand knowledge and I rely on the opinions of those who have more first hand knowledge.. Not the opinions of a reporter who has been told what they can and cannot say.
I haven't fallen for anything. The stuff you have said directly contradicts training I had in 1998.
PAX
Oh boy here we go with the planes didn't bring down the buildings but bombs did. Look its been proven that the temps at which jet fuel burns would weaken the steel by as much as 60% to maybe 80% the weakened steel would not have been able to support the building so it failed. Don't believ my word here? Fine go check the older post where I linked tons of sites that had PROOF that you dismissed!
I'm done
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
