Repentant arms dealer "No Hijackers For 911"

Just keep on reading.......

Link

i read 3/4 of it and i'm already confused...hope you don't too.....it's interesting when he said he knew the pilot who was given orders to shoot down a plane....

Originally posted by Axl
Just keep on reading.......

Link

i read 3/4 of it and i'm already confused...hope you don't too.....it's interesting when he said he knew the pilot who was given orders to shoot down a plane....

It almost sounds not like the motivations of a repentful arms dealer but,
the gripes of a bankrupt buisness man doesn't it.

Makes perfect sense to me. I don't know how much is true, though. I like the part of the Pennsylvania flight being shot down by the North Dakota National Guard F-16.

Rense.com?



need I say more? The pentagon in a military coup?



Come on...

Originally posted by edsinger
Rense.com?



need I say more? The pentagon in a military coup?



Come on...

There cant be a military coup here right now these people have it all a coup would just screw it up...Their budgets are up, there being upgraded to state of the art equipt., they are basically stomping around the whole world doing what ever they want and the wars are not going to end soon if they did the military would be put back in nutural beggins for more work to keep them from getting cooled off. The military has become the beneficiary of a president gone rogue they have no plans to stop that.

One interesting thing... on Sunday, I was watching an interview with Capt. Robert Pich�, an Air Transat pilot who made the news in August 2001 for landing his passenger aircraft safely in the Azores after losing an engine during flight.

He was asked how it was possible for a terrorist with a basic training in flying a plane to slam it so precisely in a tower in New York City.

Said Pich�, "The only way it would've been possible is if he had access to the GPS systems inside the tower. If he didn't have that, I don't know how he did it."

Originally posted by Otts
One interesting thing... on Sunday, I was watching an interview with Capt. Robert Pich�, an Air Transat pilot who made the news in August 2001 for landing his passenger aircraft safely in the Azores after losing an engine during flight.

He was asked how it was possible for a terrorist with a basic training in flying a plane to slam it so precisely in a tower in New York City.

Said Pich�, "The only way it would've been possible is if he had access to the GPS systems inside the tower. If he didn't have that, I don't know how he did it."

In this is there an implication the FAA is involved

bryan - I can't answer your question. He was just invited on a talk-show and asked his opinion as a pilot.

Basically, what he said is that you have to remember those planes go 800 km an hour and a tower is a pretty slim target at that speed.

This is the guy's site - www.robertpiche.com...

Actually, more info to be found here www.iasa.com.au...


EDITED to add a link


[edit on 26-10-2004 by Otts]

Originally posted by Otts
bryan - I can't answer your question. He was just invited on a talk-show and asked his opinion as a pilot.

Basically, what he said is that you have to remember those planes go 800 km an hour and a tower is a pretty slim target at that speed.

This is the guy's site - www.robertpiche.com...

Actually, more info to be found here www.iasa.com.au...


EDITED to add a link


[edit on 26-10-2004 by Otts]

Ill look it over thanks,,,but it sounds like the FAA either had a security failure or worse an insider position dont it.

Said Pich�, "The only way it would've been possible is if he had access to the GPS systems inside the tower. If he didn't have that, I don't know how he did it."

Uh, what?

You mean, it's impossible for me to stand at the base of a building and record what my hand-held GPS unit tells me is the coordinates in lat/long for that building. Nope, it's quite easy.

What's HARD is telling the PLANE to fly to those coordinates. Or maybe not. Maybe, because they're pretty computerized, one only has to plot that course into the flight computer as a destination or even way-point.

Overriding the systems is the hard part here. I sincerely expect that the planes were completely remote controlled, or had rogue systems installed into them that allowed them to trek along non-approved flight paths.

In the end, I recall a quote saying that 'military precision' was required for the second flight hitting the second tower in the execution of the banking manuever that occured seconds before impact.

Being that the modern flight control systems would REJECT that input as spurious/dangerous, the systems HAD to be overridden.

Nuff said.

the government must had overridden the control system since they are the only one who knows how.......or maybe they installed some kind of software where only the government can override the control system causing the pilots to have no control over the planes.......

Building 7 might have been used as a command center to coordinate the new york city wtc attacks.

Skeptical ?

Watch these videos and judge for yourself:

WTC Crash

www.reopen911.org...

www.reopen911.org...

Pentagon Crash

www.reopen911.org...

www.reopen911.org...

Hitting buildings as big as the WTC isnt particularly hard. If you head the plane in the right direction, at a low altitude, all you have to do is look at the New York skyline and aim straight at the two tallest buildings. Remember, these planes werent going very fast when they hit the buildings, certainly not 800km per hour. At that slow speed, there was plenty of time for course adjustments.