Was 9/11 a terrorist attack?

Errrm the Phone calls. You know the very same phone calls in which you pick and chose which bits you take and which bits you don't?

Errrmmm... Sorry? Were they not in contact with ATC and didn't they tell ATC what they heard?

I really do have to wonder now if you are actually as dumb as a bag of hammers.

My Points have been the following...

It was more important for the Hijackers to remain in control of the cockpit that risk being overcome by trying to control the whole plane, with the reasonable assumption that for the short time (30 minutes) the Passengers wouldn't not do anything about it.

Second point

The fact that it would mean that people would be able to make phone calls wouldn't actually mean much since not much valuable intelligence would be gained or indeed gathered that would stop the planes from achieving their mission. For UA 93, this turned out to be a wrong assumption - however this must then be balanced with the trade offs that the Hijackers must make to have a reasonable chance of sucess in their missions.

Third Point.

ATC did not know that the Planes where hijacked until 8:25, not 10 minutes before as you claimed.

Lets actually get my points right...

So you think keeping the key bearers, next to the doors which their keys open, make access to the cockpit more, or less easy?

Care to point out why you left out several parts of information which directly contradict oyur points? Sorry, I seem to have answered that one for you.

Who? And can you point out where they differentiated from procedure (apart from the times where ATC and NORAD differed from prcoedure to make the possible intercept time shorter - because that of course would contradict you. Whoops.) or unduly lagged?

Now of course, this requires evidence - not your assumptions on things which you have little knowledge about.

http://www.archives.gov/legislative/...t-sept2005.pdf

Page 9 8:23AM:.

Could you explain that bit then?


Thats the Chain of command and communication for you. Was American Airlines compicit in the murder of their work collegues and passengers?

Incidentally, in a normal (i.e. one which isn't a kamikaze strike) hijacking, would a delay of full 7 minutes be critical and cause passengers to lose their lives?

Actually what happened in the ATC eyes is that they stopped recieving Flight 11 transponder signal. You then work back and then eliminate the possibilities before you get to the 'assumption' that the transponder was turned off.

A plane not responding to hails, ATC stop recieving a transponder signal, is that indicative of a Hijacking? Yeah possibly, in that case certainly. Is it indicative that a plane might have electrical issues which is screwing with its communications and other electrical deivces? Very much so.

What were ATC supposed to think that that time?

Yeah unbelievable that that a large organisation like American Airlines, whose operation Centres and not in the same place as the AA Headquarters...

So lets see

Ong rang the Reservations line at 8:19. lets say that Gonzalez was at this end (well she was.)

At 8:21, Gonzalez contacts Marquis at the System Operations Centre in Fort Worth. What was reported is that Attendants had been stabbed, Flight 11 was reporting an emergency and Flight Attendeants couldn't reach the cockpit.

ATC specialist from Fort Worth SOC contacts ATC to ask about the status of Flight 11 - Why?

Now at 8:33 since you've like to simply quote mining, its up to me to post the entirity of the excerpt.

Yeah, that is so completely ludicrous chain of events I might just go and top myself.

And this report at 8:36:

And?

lets see the post in its entirty...

Hmmm Quoting mining again? Why did you embolden that bit of text? Or did you just miss out most of it because it doesn't sound half as sinister?

Yeah... complete fantasy story...

Can you count up how many people were involved, where they all where, how many people they needed to interact with who are unnamed and then all of a sudden in doesn't become that ludicrous.

What do you do incidently. It might help to shed some light on why exactly you're a bit niave about how quickly or not, information and decisions moves through and between large organisations.

Yeah... Flight 11 wasn't responding the Radio Hails, which means that the plane must have been kidnapped. They really should have iniatated hijacking protocols then.

Or when the transponder signal went (which is not uncommon at all, and is actually happened enough that it caused a few planes to be shot down in war time...).

Lthse, try and misrepresent the evidence all you wish, But I'll just post it up with the correct analysis for you. Its tiresome, but somebody has to do it.

But they didn't need to because the procedures in place did not allow the Planes to be launched any faster than they did... as below you'll find efforts of ATC and NORAD to bypass procedure with varying degrees of success.

Hell, so by those excerpts, Fighters at Otis would haven't taken longer to get Airborne. So whats that? Everybody following procedure except in the cases where it can reduce the time for intercept?

Errrm, I would suggest, quite rightly, that the procedures have been changed somewhat to deal with 9/11 type threats. Talking about Kamikaze Hijackings however is VERY relevant, because up until that point, nobody was crashing planes into buildings on purpose...

Ministry of Defence | Defence News | Equipment and Logistics | Royal Air Force Typhoon roars into new role protecting the UK skies (VIDEO)

Why weren't the 'military' acknowledge the very instant which Craig Marquis was informed that Flight 11 was 'declared Emergency'. Is its American Airlines role or responsibility to contact the Military? Do they know who to contact?

Do they even have the authority to request USAF assitance? Nope...

Or what about this report at 8:32:

Do ATC ask for USAF assistance everytime a plane's transponder fails?

Can an ATC controller have the authority to request assitance from the USAF? no... Their bosses do, and its them who take the responsibility.

So it took an whole 15 minutes for NORAD to be made aware of a hijacking.

Errrmmm... Because they were discussing the best course of action to take in those 5 minutes? Because they were dealing with a Hijacking and not a kamikaze strike?

Yeah, a complete farce.

What is it you do? For somebody who claims it a complete farce, you must have had exprience and knowledge of the procedures? Oh thats right. You don't.

If you are trying to say, if it happened now, one of the first organisations to be informed would be the airforce then you would be quite correct. This is of course down to the lessons learned from 9/11 that the procedures did not allow organisations to a) consider that planes could be used as weapons b) it did not delegate responsibility further enough down the line to allow a request for Military assistance to be done much sooner.

However 9/11 by definiton, did not have those modified procedures.

Nevermind hey?

Try again.

Are those the very same residues which can be left by cutting torches? Like those used during the removal of debris from Ground zero?

It's the residue of an explosive.

__________________
"The perfect liberty they seek is the liberty of making slaves of other people." -- Abraham Lincoln


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Really?

Traces of thermate at the WTC

It seems we can’t be completely sure that these samples are from the WTC, and there’s no way to accurately assess whether they might have been contaminated.

hmmm.

Question - How much thermate 'explosive' must have been used to detect a 'residue' of 'thermate' in all the debris?

Its something which only merits a sentence of dismissal from Jones, Gage & Co. How much thermate must have been used to have such a copious amount and distribution of the unreacted substance?€

Have fun answering that one.

2 planes would have a very hard time bringing down all of two huge towers on their own footprint.

3

2 planes would have a very hard time bringing down all of two huge towers on their own footprint.

Now, 2 planes bringing down 3 buildings like that? HOW?!

Oh! They were jealous of our freedom, I see! Cos we can say 'No' to treaties and that be that, and we can decide what we can put in our bodies and our politicians are out for our best!

I cant believe the world can be so stupid

Maybe the foundations of the 3rd building were dodgy? Then the Vibrations of the Twin Towers collapsing in on themselves would cause the 3rd building to collapse?

That is such an insightful and thoughtful comment, that after 700 plus posts in just one thread - you've now convinced me that something is strange aout the whole thing...

You dont build buildings like that on dodgey foundations man, they are built to withstand terror attacks, earthquakes, etc.

Even if that was the case, how could it just fall on its on footprint? It would have to topple or fall off to one side.

Instead there was nothing left of anything, just doesnt make sense.
Bin Laden past CIA record is enough to get you questioning.