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.
Originally posted by Lynda101 I still puzzle over why the hell in the USA instead of flying into buildings, they simply didn't drop bombs from the planes.
Originally posted by rjh01a
Originally posted by C46driver
Auto GPS positioning of the aircraft (lazy pilots dream) or auto GPS alignment? We hat that back in 1996, customer option of course.
Yes, and a C46 is a Military version of the DC-3. So it seems you corroborate the OP that the Military did have Auto-Align capability.
Originally posted by rjh01a
Originally posted by C46driver
Originally posted by rjh01aHow much time do you have flying an American Airlines 757?
Zero hours.
However i do have 9200 hours flying the B737, 757 and 767 + a few WW2 aircrafts.
I've seen enough lies from P4T that anything coming from them ends up in the trash bin.
I ask again C46.
Does this look like the IRS was aligned at the gate with Present Position and then "fast aligned" at the runway?
edit on 5-3-2011 by rjh01a because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by rjh01a
Agreed, and good point. P4T would have no reason to go faking the data.
2) The walls of the Pentagon are made of 18" of steel reinforced concrete. There was a nearly perfectly round hole at the inside of the 3rd ring. That's 9' of steel reinforced concrete that this aircraft penetrated. Really? An aluminum airplane pierced through 9 feet of steel reinforced concrete and was still intact and strong enough to leave a nice, neat hole on the inside wall of the 3rd ring?
The extensive use of reinforced concrete and non-reinforced masonry was one concession. Certainly the threat of any kind of terrorist attack on the building was far from the thoughts of the original designers. As a result, the Pentagon was constructed with a thin limestone facade over a brick infill between reinforced concrete floors, structurally supported by a reinforced concrete beam and column frame. Enough to protect from the elements but not from the potential forces of significant blast events. 2
This argument is based on a misunderstanding of the Pentagon's design. In fact, the light wells between the C- and D-ring and D- and E-ring are only three stories deep. The first and second stories span the distance between the Pentagon's facade and the punctured C-ring wall, which faces a ground-level courtyard. There are no masonry walls in this space, only load-bearing columns. Thus it would be possible for an aircraft part that breached the facade to travel through this area on the ground floor, miss the columns, and puncture the C-ring wall without having encountering anything more than unsubstantial gypsum walls and furniture in-between.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You'd have to be particularly naive to think it impossible that they might have reasons to fabricate evidence.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by rjh01a
Agreed, and good point. P4T would have no reason to go faking the data.
Are you serious? P4T thrive on the oxygen of publicity and sell stuff on their website. You'd have to be particularly naive to think it impossible that they might have reasons to fabricate evidence.
Anyway, it doesn't particularly matter, since it's a simple fact that they have lied in the past.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You'd have to be particularly naive to think it impossible that they might have reasons to fabricate evidence.
And you'd have to be particularly naive to believe P4T would alter data obtained from a FOIA request in the face of so many who have checked it.
Originally posted by nexusferox
THIS is my only question, and is for the pilots in here:
could YOU fly that course in that (or any) aircraft, then find the pentagon, or even washington dc, after deviating from your original course without the aid of all your sophisticated technology and control centers?
think about the question. Supposedly, someone who had never been in the cockpit of this aircraft or flown one, managed to alter the flightplan, maintain the correct headings, and hundreds of miles later hit his mark WITHOUT THE AID OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS. How? did he read roadsigns?
is it really that easy?
cos if it is, you guys get paid WAY too much
Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by zimishey
Spot on assessment.
Excellent post zimishey.
Now, all we need to do is link to a counter-disinformation tactics video clip, and we're all set.
Anyone got any CDT video clips for us to study up on? We've got to do something, this is getting more ridiculous as time drags on, around and around, back and forth.
Real evidence and proof gets painstakingly researched and presented, only for certain cretins to attempt to derail and nullify and around we go again.
Personally, those most vocal on the OSer side of things should be forced to stay on topic or get banned.
BTW, here's a post you and others curious about 'fake' members may be interested in;
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Here's a snippet from the thread:
Using the assigned social media accounts we can automate the posting of content that is relevant to the persona. In this case there are specific social media strategy website RSS feeds we can subscribe to and then repost content on twitter with the appropriate hashtags.
In fact using hashtags and gaming some location based check-in services we can make it appear as if a persona was actually at a conference and introduce himself/herself to key individuals as part of the exercise, as one example. There are a variety of social media tricks we can use to add a level of realness to all fictitious personas
So there you have it...it's here in black and white, *no* ambiguity whatsoever...TPTB are flooding the internet with fake accounts and fake members in order to post disinformation to forums, blogs, social networks, twitter and probably just about everywhere else where people communicate online.
Add to that, an Obama (or was it Bush) White house official said they were planning 'infiltrate conspiracy forums and websites, and sow confusion and division among members', words to that effect. Sorry, can't remember who it was who said that, a Jewish gentleman i believe if that helps rings a bell for anyone, i've searched here, (and i know it was posted here on ATS) but just can't find it.
Not such a 'tin-foil hat' scenario after all then, they *are* here, both real and artificial and their only intent is to confuse and divide, and generally put a cat amongst the Pigeons to thwart any meaningful debate.
Again, it's in black and white, and has been admitted to by the Whitehouse and now DHS security consultancy firms have too.
There's no conspiracy, if they openly admit it, yet still people won't believe their government is capable of crap like this, and roll eyes at the mere suggestion they would do things like this to prevent discovering the truth about 9/11.
If talking about the aircraft skin would be right, but just under skin are heavy substanial structural pieces - ie the keel beam which is the largest part on an aircaft and supports the cabin floor and cargo hold.
The "rebar" looks to be wires pushed out by the impact