The Pentagon was hit on 9/11 it wasn't staged.

Originally posted by mrmulder

Here are two link to the timeline of Flight 93 and Flight 175:

If you follow read them carefully you'll see that the government had more than enough time to scramble jets after the second plane hit the WTC's.

The fact that proves your speculation to be fallacy is that in order for fighters to be scrambled, they have to be on alert, no to mention armed with live ordinance. Since shortly after the cold war ended until 9/11, we had not had said fighters on alert.

Those who know anything about launching an aircraft, especially one with live ordinance on board, know that it takes more than a few minutes to do so UNLESS they are on alert.


Actually, I had a lengthy discussion with lots of links in another thread...careful, it's in the mudpit from the old "Colonel" days....parental discretion advised....

www.abovetopsecret.com...





[edit on 5-8-2004 by Affirmative Reaction]

Originally posted by mrmulder
That video is still in contrversoy by not only the critics but others as well.

Then how do you explain the plane like derbits consistent with a 757-200.

Originally posted by esdad71
Did you ever think that maybe they truly di not knowhow may other planes there were out there?Where do you scramble too? do you suddenly shadow every flight there is? Intercepting another 'milatary' craft is one thing, or if there are 'known' terrorists on board making demands.

9/11 was not a recon mission by Soviet or similar aircraft, was not a hijacked jet demanding a place to land..This was murder, plain and simple.

Uh, excuse me. Only four planes went of course and procedures state when a plane veers off course that's when you take flight and intercept.

Originally posted by mrmulder

Uh, excuse me. Only four planes went of course and procedures state when a plane veers off course that's when you take flight and intercept.

Uh, Excuse me...where do you get THIS information?????

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by mrmulder
That video is still in contrversoy by not only the critics but others as well.

Then how do you explain the plane like derbits consistent with a 757-200.

I don't. I'm only telling you that the video is too hazy to prove that it was a 757. That's why it is in speculation and controversy.

Originally posted by Sauron
The Cell phone store is bogus
MIRACLES AND WONDERS Last week, USA Today reported a joint effort between Qualcomm and American Airlines' to allow passengers to make cellphone calls from aircraft in flight. According to the story, the satellite-based system employs a "Pico cell" to act as a small cellular tower.
"It worked great," gushed Monte Ford, American Airline's chief information officer. "I called the office. I called my wife. I called a friend in Paris. They all heard me great, and I could hear them loud and clear."
Before this new "Pico cell," it was nigh on impossible to make a call from a passenger aircraft in flight. Connection is impossible at altitudes over 8000 feet or speeds in excess of 230 mph.
www.nypress.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> more



[edit on 5-8-2004 by Sauron]

Thank you Sauron. You're right on about that. You're not allowed to make cell phone calls in the air because of that.

Originally posted by mrmulder
Uh, excuse me. Only four planes went of course and procedures state when a plane veers off course that's when you take flight and intercept.

Really, can you post these procedures to back up your claim?

There are set paramaters that have to be met before the FAA even contacts NORAD. Then NORAD has to task planes for interception. Those planes have to be pre-flighted, armed, and take off before they can commence the interception.

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by mrmulder

Uh, excuse me. Only four planes went of course and procedures state when a plane veers off course that's when you take flight and intercept.

Uh, Excuse me...where do you get THIS information?????

Right here:

www.faa.gov...-1-2

Originally posted by Sauron
The Cell phone store is bogus

Check the superthread for info on that as well. We here at ATS have proven that cell phones can in fact be used on aircraft in flight.

Keep in mind that the aircraft that were hijacked were flying low and slow in order to find the targets. Once acquired they throttled up for the terminal manuever.

Also keep in mind the cell coverage that DC has.

Originally posted by mrmulder

Originally posted by Sauron
The Cell phone store is bogus
MIRACLES AND WONDERS Last week, USA Today reported a joint effort between Qualcomm and American Airlines' to allow passengers to make cellphone calls from aircraft in flight. According to the story, the satellite-based system employs a "Pico cell" to act as a small cellular tower.
"It worked great," gushed Monte Ford, American Airline's chief information officer. "I called the office. I called my wife. I called a friend in Paris. They all heard me great, and I could hear them loud and clear."
Before this new "Pico cell," it was nigh on impossible to make a call from a passenger aircraft in flight. Connection is impossible at altitudes over 8000 feet or speeds in excess of 230 mph.
www.nypress.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> more



[edit on 5-8-2004 by Sauron]

Thank you Sauron. You're right on about that. You're not allowed to make cell phone calls in the air because of that.

Cell phones aren't allowed because it distracts passengers from the warning messages that tell you things like buckle your seat belt and were the exits are. The official FAA reason is because they are believed to cause some interference. Even though it hasn't been proven the FAA isn't takig chances.

[edit on 8/5/2004 by cyberdude78]

Originally posted by Sauron
Why was there no luggage? Why were there no bodies?

Why are you making assumptions?
Did you talk to any of the recovery workers who spent countless hours in the rubble of the Pentagon?

I did.
One of my best friends was hip-deep in concrete and body parts.

I guess he made up that child-sized suitcase he found with toys and small clothing spiling out, huh?

*sighs*

Originally posted by mrmulder


Right here:

www.faa.gov...-1-2

Well, that's wonderful...you have managed to post the definitions of Class A through D Controlled Airspace. Wonderful.

However, you didn't come CLOSE to answering the question asked!!! Where do you get your information about WHEN an aircraft is to be intercepted!

Let me remind those listening in that I am a 20+ year active duty Air Force Aircrew member. I'm waiting for this answer with baited breath......

For me the question isn't whether the event happened, It appears genuine. It is whether a cellular operation like Al-Queda is easily manipulated into doing the will of people with finesse and power. If you intercede in a single cell of the operation above the actual hijackers you could have them thinking this was a holy war against the 'Great Satan' west. When in fact it is an orchestrated operation of those who believe they will benefit from fostering a fear of terrorism here in the US. Americans get frightened, and then are willing to relinquish more of their civil liberties. And many of them even think they are doing it for patriotic reasons.

I for one think it is obvious that Oklahoma City was orchestrated. This makes 9-11 easily suspect in my mind.

It is the subtle manipulation of people that is most difficult to detect.

Religious zealots, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, etc. are easy targets of manipulators. They operate on submission to divine and mysterious powers. They are meat-puppets al-a-carte.
.

Originally posted by FredT

Originally posted by Gools
I don't think there ever was a question as to whether or not the pentagon was hit or that the whole thing was staged.

The question has always revolved around WHAT hit it.

A Boeing 757-200 clearly hit the building. In addition to the radar tracing, a parking lot security cam caught a glimps of it striking the ground before it hit etc. Not to mention all the witnesses

Oh yeah, right!
Did a 757-200 'clearly' hit the building?
Oh and of course the government agencies spewed forth the proof with fancy radar images and security camera footage. Give me a break.

This is a prime example of the entire 9/11 thing that has fooled too many people too easily. If you believe this s*** then you deserve the fascist police state that you will soon find yourself living in.

This has been beaten to death and there is no hard evidence whatsoever to prove that a passenger aircraft hit the god damn pentagon.
Unf****** believable!

Originally posted by Banshee

Originally posted by Sauron
Why was there no luggage? Why were there no bodies?

Why are you making assumptions?
Did you talk to any of the recovery workers who spent countless hours in the rubble of the Pentagon?

I did.
One of my best friends was hip-deep in concrete and body parts.

I guess he made up that child-sized suitcase he found with toys and small clothing spiling out, huh?

*sighs*

Get real bud!
Body parts from who? Those who were killed inside the pentagon or those from the 'mystery plane'?
And how convincing that they found a suitcase with toys.
Ooooohhh, you are so clever. All circumstancial evidence that doesn't mean s***.

Let's see.....gullible, pro Bush, pro war on terror, anti-conspiracy...wait, I must be a moderator!

Originally posted by The Merovingian



This is a prime example of the entire 9/11 thing that has fooled too many people too easily. If you believe this s*** then you deserve the fascist police state that you will soon find yourself living in.

This has been beaten to death and there is no hard evidence whatsoever to prove that a passenger aircraft hit the god damn pentagon.
Unf****** believable!

Wow...where did the steroid boy with the anal-cranial inversion syndrome come from....?????


I'm thinking Banshee is about to do a little blasting without dynamite, eh???

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by mrmulder


Right here:

www.faa.gov...-1-2

Well, that's wonderful...you have managed to post the definitions of Class A through D Controlled Airspace. Wonderful.

However, you didn't come CLOSE to answering the question asked!!! Where do you get your information about WHEN an aircraft is to be intercepted!

Let me remind those listening in that I am a 20+ year active duty Air Force Aircrew member. I'm waiting for this answer with baited breath......

Okay what about this one? www.faa.gov...-2-5

10-2-6. HIJACKED AIRCRAFT

When you observe a Mode 3/A Code 7500, an unexplained loss of beacon code, change in direction of flight or altitude, and/or a loss of communications, notify supervisory personnel immediately. As it relates to observing a Code 7500, do the following:


You're in the Air Force so you should know the procedures.

[edit on 5-8-2004 by mrmulder]

Thumbs up to Mr. Sparkly Brain
Keep up the fight.

Originally posted by mrmulder


Okay what about this one? www.faa.gov...-2-5

10-2-6. HIJACKED AIRCRAFT

When you observe a Mode 3/A Code 7500, an unexplained loss of beacon code, change in direction of flight or altitude, and/or a loss of communications, notify supervisory personnel immediately. As it relates to observing a Code 7500, do the following:


You're in the Air Force so you should know the procedures.

[edit on 5-8-2004 by mrmulder]

I do know the procedures. You have proven you do not. Squawking 7500 is the crew's signal that the aircraft is being hijacked, which since these documents became public knowledge is seldom used any more, but the code still exists. However, you STILL haven't proven your ascertation that an aircraft simply going off course is automatically reason for it to be intercepted. It is not. If it were, there would be HUNDREDS of interceptions every MONTH!!!! What you have shown here is the procedures that ATC (Air Traffic Control) follows when they are advised BY THE CREW that they are being hijacked.

This never happened with the 9/11 aircraft until the end when one hijacker said, "we have other planes"...

Nice try, but you are still way off...keep trying though......


By the way...do you know what the Mode 3/A is????


[edit on 5-8-2004 by Affirmative Reaction]

Originally posted by Affirmative Reaction

Originally posted by mrmulder


Okay what about this one? www.faa.gov...-2-5

10-2-6. HIJACKED AIRCRAFT

When you observe a Mode 3/A Code 7500, an unexplained loss of beacon code, change in direction of flight or altitude, and/or a loss of communications, notify supervisory personnel immediately. As it relates to observing a Code 7500, do the following:


You're in the Air Force so you should know the procedures.

[edit on 5-8-2004 by mrmulder]

I do know the procedures. You have proven you do not. Squawking 7500 is the crew's signal that the aircraft is being hijacked, which since these documents became public knowledge is seldom used any more, but the code still exists. However, you STILL haven't proven your ascertation that an aircraft simply going off course is automatically reason for it to be intercepted. It is not. If it were, there would be HUNDREDS of interceptions every MONTH!!!! What you have shown here is the procedures that ATC (Air Traffic Control) follows when they are advised BY THE CREW that they are being hijacked.

This never happened with the 9/11 aircraft until the end when one hijacker said, "we have other planes"...

Nice try, but you are still way off...keep trying though......


By the way...do you know what the Mode 3/A is????


[edit on 5-8-2004 by Affirmative Reaction]

I guess you're not a pilot because I have a good friend who's in the US Navy Reserve and is a flight nurse and she told me, and I agree with her that

"You wouldn't say out loud that you're being hijacked to other planes in the area to cause mass histeria and uneeded diversion of air traffic."

Lt. Miller
USNR
NC & Flight Nurse