IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Aircraft Swap - Scene From 9/11: Intercepted

Rating 5 V
 
onesliceshort
post Jun 21 2011, 07:38 AM
Post #41



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE
QUOTE (Colin)
Cheap Shot P.S I have not looked at the radar piece again that you asked me to look at, I think I may have some free time tomorrow and I will look at it again. I'll try to answer your question about the 180 degree turns.


QUOTE (Rob)
Anytime you're free Colin, feel free to answer. As you can tell, I don't have a problem reminding you, considering this is perhaps the fifth time you been asked, and perhaps the third time you replied, "I'll look at it tomorrow". Some might call such behavior... evasion.


Devil's in the detail I've always found.

Don't know if it's worth a "shot" but...bump?

Edit:

QUOTE (Colin)
As far as the planes out of Langley they were launched becasue of the phantom AAL11 call. I don't see how that could be disinformation when this is the information that generated the scramble call. As far as the wrong direction that was a lapse in some one not passing the target information to FACSFAC VACAPES who put them on the standard scramble route out of Langley.


What is the "standard scramble route out of Langley"?

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Jun 21 2011, 08:13 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 21 2011, 12:54 PM
Post #42



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,724
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jun 21 2011, 08:38 AM) *
Devil's in the detail I've always found.

Don't know if it's worth a "shot" but...bump?


"Fight or flight" comes to mind... clearly Colin has chosen "flight" with respect to the above question. Of course i'm sure he will use the excuse "they were mean to me!" (sniffle)

Reason being, he doesnt have an answer.

But as i have stated, he will not be able to escape such a question.


There are 3 possibilities here to describe the behavior of Colin Scoggins over the past several pages.

Colin is incompetent.

Colin is a dupe.

Colin was involved.

Your mileage may vary.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jun 22 2011, 09:36 AM
Post #43



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (Rob)
"Fight or flight" comes to mind... clearly Colin has chosen "flight" with respect to the above question. Of course i'm sure he will use the excuse "they were mean to me!" (sniffle)


Jeez, he should tae a wander over to his OCT buddy forums and experience some "quality time" at the brunt of those nasty ass entities...
His answers reminded me of the duhbunkeresque answers to valid questions. Broad sweeping statements that avoid the meat o the bones of the question or (as in Colin's case) no answer at all. I thought the posters here were very civil given the 10 years of running into 404ed pages and lies when he had the opportunity to clear some thing up for us "CTs".

On his statement about the Langley fighters "standard scramble route" (I know you're watching Colin), is this a statement of fact? Were those guys at Langley making things up about going against protocol when Langley Air Force Base was left without an on the ground co-ordinator? That all three were on separate communcation channels? That two of them actually thought they were looking at the New York skyline when in fact they were looking at the Pentagon smoke plume (just to give an idea how messed up they were)? And that they were ordered to travel at "Max Sonic" (that is, to not break the sound barrier)? That the first one of them heard about either of the tower impacts was through a phonecall from his girlfriend?

Well worth the read Colin:

http://es.scribd.com/doc/13653324/T8-B22-F...d-Leslie-Filson

CT my arse.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 22 2011, 09:44 AM
Post #44



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,724
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jun 22 2011, 10:36 AM) *
On his statement about the Langley fighters "standard scramble route" (I know you're watching Colin), is this a statement of fact?


QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jun 13 2011, 09:54 PM) *
They were initially called to scramble at 0908 direct NYC due to the second tower impact. It was then changed to battlestations. After "AA11 still airborne somewhere over NJ" was repeated through the system [initiated by Colin]... they [Langley Fighters] were launched at 0924 and told to hold in W-386 until someone was able to get a pin-point location for the Phantom AA11. Once an explosion occurred at the Pentagon, Langley fighters were then turned direct DC from W-386 out over the Atlantic. Again, it's all on radar according to RADES and well covered in our full film.

Had the bogus disinformation regarding a Phantom AA11 not been repeated through the system, the Langley Fighters would have launched at 0908 direct NYC. When Washington noticed a high speed target penetrating Washington Class Bravo from the west, Langley fighters would have been over DC at that time, in perfect position to intercept.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anthony
post Jun 24 2011, 11:48 AM
Post #45





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 10
Joined: 13-January 07
From: Tustin, Cal
Member No.: 443



Do you realize what you are doing?

I can see the necessity of switching planes. To conceive and plan such a massive crime require that every contingency be guarded against. Where four passenger-laden planes are to be hi-jacked within an hour, the possibility that crew members or passsengers could overpower hi-jackers is a distinct threat; especially with instant communication afforded by cell phones.

How could this be done? Easy. The hi-jack could be effected without the slightes show of force or cause for alarm. At the appointed time, an operative, masquerading as an appropriate government official, would direct the plane to land immediately owing to a mechanical problem. Passengers would then be requested to shut off their cell phones on the pretext they would interfere with the plane's navigation system.

Once on the ground, passengers and crew would be put to death and reduced to molecules. Everyone of them had to be done away; you simply cannot ask, and expect, some 250 unwilling participants in an unprecedented crime to hold their tongues.

If drones were xubstituted for the "hi-jacked" passenger jets, a whole new set of questions arises.

For example, "What happened to the passengers?" Certainly, they couldn't be allowwed to tell their tales; so, "How were they killed... how were their bodies disposed of... fire... dumped in the ocean?"

Also, can you trace the merging aircraft back to their airports? Then, can you obtain these airports' departure logs to ID the merging aircraft? This leads to additional questions.

Further, most 9-11 victims were identified by their DNA. For this to be valid, there has to be a verifiable chain of possession from crime scene to lab. You need names, their reports, shipping docs, among others.

Agencies involved are required to retain these docs. If they do not exist or have been destroyed, you need names of those who destroyed such docs; for, you have found some who are complicit.

Anthony
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jun 24 2011, 04:14 PM
Post #46





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



Rob,

Here's the overlay I was talking about.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jun 24 2011, 04:18 PM
Post #47





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



Anthony,

"Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora" ["It is pointless to do with more what can be done with less"]. Thus, according to Ockham, we ought never to postulate the reality of any entity unless it is logically necessary to do so.

http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/o.htm#ockh
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
23investigator
post Jun 25 2011, 06:38 AM
Post #48





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 377
Joined: 28-November 10
From: Australia
Member No.: 5,467



QUOTE (Culper721 @ Jun 25 2011, 06:48 AM) *
Anthony,

"Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora" ["It is pointless to do with more what can be done with less"]. Thus, according to Ockham, we ought never to postulate the reality of any entity unless it is logically necessary to do so.

http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/o.htm#ockh



Dear Culper

Thankyou for persevering.

It would be good to better understand what you consider the 'map' shows.

Robert
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jun 25 2011, 08:58 AM
Post #49





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



QUOTE (23investigator @ Jun 23 2011, 10:38 AM) *
Dear Culper

Thankyou for persevering.

It would be good to better understand what you consider the 'map' shows.

Robert


Simply put, the map shows that the those pilots weren't good; they were perfect. Just focusing on AAL 11, you have a perfect exploitation of a hole in the primary radar that day; i.e. turning off the transponder just when it hits the cusp of the hole. The exploitation of information that was classified that day necessitates the existence of a treasonable design at the very least.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jun 25 2011, 09:39 AM
Post #50





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,944
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Good to see you back Bob. thumbsup.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Anthony
post Jun 26 2011, 02:28 PM
Post #51





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 10
Joined: 13-January 07
From: Tustin, Cal
Member No.: 443



'Culper721'

You wrote, "Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora"

So… how does Occam’s Razor connect to my comments?

It is the nature of inquiry that each fact leads to a theretofore unasked question.

It is compellingly obvious a passenger plane did not strike the Pentagon.

Flight AA77 disappeared from radar screens for several minutes… then reappeared.

The video, ‘Intercepted’, depicts two aircraft merge paths, based on government-provided data. The second continues on the other’s path while the other peels off and descends from view.

These facts lead to a very logical and on-point question, “What happened to the passenger-laden planes… and their passengers?”

To be more concise, “Are they prisoners… or were they murdered?”

Then, “How long must we dawdle while they wait for rescue… or for someone to bring justice to their memories?”

By the way, one of my favorite Latin maxims is, ‘fiat justitia ruat cælum’. A loose, and gentle, translation, “Let justice be done, and let artificial blinders be damned.”

Anthony
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
woody
post Jun 26 2011, 03:16 PM
Post #52


Woody Box


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (Culper721 @ Jun 25 2011, 01:58 PM) *
Simply put, the map shows that the those pilots weren't good; they were perfect. Just focusing on AAL 11, you have a perfect exploitation of a hole in the primary radar that day; i.e. turning off the transponder just when it hits the cusp of the hole. The exploitation of information that was classified that day necessitates the existence of a treasonable design at the very least.


Hi Culper,

talking about radar holes - do you refer to the map originally published by Frank Levi on his website? The one with the circles?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
WetBlanket
post Jun 28 2011, 07:23 PM
Post #53





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 64
Joined: 29-October 07
Member No.: 2,415



I'm not sure they had to kill all the passengers. Since a search of the Social Security Death Index says Todd Beamer died in 1997 he probably wasn't going to squeal. Wonder how he made the phone call?
Does anybody here know any of the victims personally?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
zoeken
post Jun 28 2011, 10:27 PM
Post #54





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 66
Joined: 9-May 11
From: Hampton Roads
Member No.: 5,884



QUOTE (WetBlanket @ Jun 28 2011, 07:23 PM) *
I'm not sure they had to kill all the passengers. Since a search of the Social Security Death Index says Todd Beamer died in 1997 he probably wasn't going to squeal. Wonder how he made the phone call?
Does anybody here know any of the victims personally?



That Todd Beamer has a different middle initial and birth date.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jun 29 2011, 08:02 AM
Post #55



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (woody @ Jun 26 2011, 09:16 PM) *
Hi Culper,

talking about radar holes - do you refer to the map originally published by Frank Levi on his website? The one with the circles?


Bump for Culper.

That's a very interesting angle. And very useable in a court of law/ of the people. Do you guys mind expanding on the cusps in the radar for the laymen amongst us? Did the other flights do the same?

Cheers

OSS
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jun 29 2011, 08:37 AM
Post #56





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



QUOTE (woody @ Jun 24 2011, 07:16 PM) *
Hi Culper,

talking about radar holes - do you refer to the map originally published by Frank Levi on his website? The one with the circles?


Frank Levi drew up that map (i.e. the one I posted) at my request.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Culper721
post Jun 29 2011, 08:54 AM
Post #57





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 210
Joined: 2-January 07
Member No.: 396



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jun 27 2011, 12:02 PM) *
Bump for Culper.

That's a very interesting angle. And very useable in a court of law/ of the people. Do you guys mind expanding on the cusps in the radar for the laymen amongst us? Did the other flights do the same?

Cheers

OSS


Flights 11 and 93 are the most obvious. In terms of legal relevancy the path and actions of flight 11 is sufficient to establish knowledge of classified information on behalf of the perpetrators. The burden then shifts to the party purporting that the 'official' story is complete and correct to account for this. Expanding on the technicalities of flights 77 and 175 as they relate to avoiding radar detection would only be cumulative per the burden shift supplied by flight 11. The important fact is that the position and timing for flight 11 was PERFECT. That necessitates the inference of knowledge of classified information which in turn necessitates a source of said classified information which in turn necessitates a treasonable design at the very least.

Evidence of a treasonable design requires, if prudence dictates anything, an internal investigation across the board regarding the events of 9/11.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
REDSHIFT
post Jun 29 2011, 11:36 PM
Post #58





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 20
Joined: 29-November 09
From: A Wormhole outside of Chicago
Member No.: 4,724



Remember the mystery emergency landings at Hopkins Airport in Cleveland of two planes, in the morning of 9/11?
Even the mayor of Cleveland couldn't keep the facts straight. Here are some untwisted twists and turns.
http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepres ... stery.html
QUOTE
Update (06/21): WoodyBox found new witnesses, which point on two different "quarantined" planes at Cleveland Hopkins (see "comments")

WoodyBox ("Flight 11 - The Twin Flight") new article is yet another groundbreaking analysis.
It appears, that the majority of 9/11 Researchers and the 9/11 family members, who lost their loved ones, have to compile a new list of questions about an airport, which didn't receive much attention yet: Cleveland Hopkins, Ohio.
Among the disturbing new details are two flights, which apparently had been part of yet another "mirror flight" scenario. "Both" got grounded in Ohio.
One of them was Delta1989, the other one was identified as, most shocking: "Flight 93"!
But there are also many new questions about some "200 passengers" of that day...

The Cleveland Airport Mystery

200 passengers got lost on 9/11 - by mailto:woody_box2000@yahoo.de Woody Box

Exclusive for INN Report -May 30

Inmidst the chaos breaking out in the hours after the WTC and Pentagon attacks, between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m an airplane made an emergency landing at Cleveland Hopkins Airport . Rumours were going around that it was hijacked or had a bomb on board. The FBI evacuated the plane and searched it with bomb-sniffing dogs after the passengers had left. It turned out to be false alarm. The plane - Delta flight1989 - was not hijacked, and there was no bomb.

However, a closer examination reveals a bunch of conflicting statements concerning Delta 1989. Neither the moment of landing, nor the number of the passengers, nor the location of the grounded plane is clear. For every aspect of the incident there are two different versions. Not one or three or four versions, but two.

This article will prove that not one, but two planes made an emergency landing in Cleveland - in close succession. The proof is based on local newspaper and radio reports from September 11th and 12th (mainly from the Akron Beacon Journal and the Cleveland Plain Dealer), statements of eyewitnesses and internet postings in the morning of 9/11 (people were listening to the radio and immediately submitted the breaking news to the net). One of the flights was indeed Delta 1989. We don't know the identity of the other one, so we call it "Flight X"...

We start with a short summary of the events in Cleveland. At 10 a.m., the airport was evacuated. Without doubt, this had to do with the rumours that a hijacked plane was going to land. The passengers had to leave the airport but were not allowed to take their car. They had to walk or got a ride at the highway. Busses were not allowed to leave the airport. People around the airport were told to go home. It was a very tense situation. These facts are undisputed.

Cleveland Mayor Michael White held a televised news conference at 11 a.m., after the emergency landing. According to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, he said there was an unconfirmed report that the plane might have been hijacked or was carrying a bomb. But in the middle of the news conference, he reported that it had not been hijacked, and later in the day he said no bomb had been found. This was not the only detail that changed in the course of the day. In the morning, White said that air controllers could hear screaming on the plane. In the afternoon, he didn't mention the screams anymore.



This is just the tip of the iceberg, there is much more to read on this page.
I'm also going to post some of the other links from it, too.
QUOTE
The Toledo Plane



White reported that another plane was diverted from Hopkins toward Toledo. Akron Beacon Journal 9/11/01

He said airport officials reported that a second airplane in distress had passed through Cleveland airspace earlier Tuesday morning before being handed off to Toledo. Officials at Toledo Express Airport did not immediately have any information about a plane headed from Cleveland. Associated Press, 9/11/01

So we have another obscure plane in an emergency situation, and in the light of the new evidence, we might ask if the Toledo Plane is identical to Flight X. It seems that Mayor White was not the best informed person in Cleveland since he changed his statements a couple of times during the day.


and more from the above link:
QUOTE
A disturbing first-hand statement comes from Virginia Buckingham. She was not only security chief of Boston Airport on 9/11, but also CEO of MA Port Authority.

By 9:30, the FAA had grounded all flights out of Boston and New York. By 9:40, all US flight operations were halted. As we tried to account for all Boston-originating flights already in the air, we received word that a Delta flight out of Logan, bound for the West Coast, had lost radio contact with air traffic control.

When exactly did Delta 1989 loose radio contact? At 9:36, Cleveland Center warned the plane to stay away from UA 93, and this USA Today report confirms that the pilot asked the controllers to land in Cleveland shortly before 9:45 when the FAA released an order to ground all planes. So until about 9:40-9:45 Delta 1989 was in contact with Air Traffic Control.

Victoria Buckingham: I felt sick to my stomach. It would be more than an hour before we received word that the flight had landed safely in Cleveland.



So it took more than an hour after the lost radio contact that Mrs. Buckingham learned of the safe landing of the flight. This must have happened at about 10:45-11:00 and perfectly fits the landing time of Flight X. Did she refer to Flight X? Delta 1989 landed at 10:10 in Cleveland, and it is unbelievable that the pilot allowed the passengers to make phone calls but didn't inform his airline about the safe landing. If Mrs. Buckingham was talking about Delta 1989, why did she had to wait more than half an hour to get the reassuring message that the plane and the passengers were okay?



http://911review.org/brad.com/Woodybox/ ... ht_93.html
Lots to read with good explanations of what was shown on radar, and the strange fact that the transponder suddenly "turned back on" before impact.
Some conflicting witnesses, make two planes seem more likely.
QUOTE
Apart from the various graphics, worthful hints to the exact position of UA 93 in Pennsylvania are hard to find in verbal reports. It follows a compilation.

* But emergency operations officials in Allegheny County and Pittsburgh hadn't trained for what happened Sept. 11. They had never rehearsed what to do about a hijacked plane flying just nine miles south of Pittsburgh International Airport, heading east along the Allegheny-Washington county line. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

* According to Dennis Fritz, air traffic manager of Johnstown Airport, UA 93 was approaching Johnstown from the south. It was twenty, then fifteen miles away from the airport before it turned south. It did not fly over Johnstown. (Jere Longman: Among the heroes, p. 197)

These two accounts are compatible with the official flight path if we accept that Fritz meant "southwest" when he said "south" of Johnstown. The following sources, however, are not:

* The 9/11 Commission Report, referring to FAA files, has UA 93 flying 20 miles northwest of Johnstown (p. 30).

* Many reports and witnesses confirm that UA 93 flew over Johnstown before it crashed:

John Hugya, an administrative assistant to U.S. Rep John Murtha, said he has been told that the plane initially flew over Cambria County Airport in Johnstown. There was no communication from the plane, and the plane was not responding to Cleveland Center, which is how they knew it was one of the hijacked planes." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Rep. John Murtha, D-Johnstown, said last night he could only guess that the plane's likely target was "a second shot at the Pentagon or the Capitol or the White House itself." "The destination sure wasn't an open field," he said. "It's fortunate it didn't come down sooner, on Johnstown." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

"There was a lot of disbelief," Mary Miller said. "You live in Shanksville or Johnstown, and you think you live in a rural area where it’s safe. You don’t think about terrorists in your back yard."
Yet there they were on September 11, flying above her, banking toward the Johnstown Airport, wings unsteady, the Boeing 757-200 coming in at an odd angle, then turning awkwardly, headed for Shanksville ten miles away, where the airliner would slam into an old strip mine, killing everyone aboard.
"Before we could even move, we were then told to evacuate the building immediately because an unidentified jet was on its way to Johnstown Airport at less than 6,000 feet and not responding to the air control tower," she said. She went outside to her car. United Flight 93 came into view, low, headed toward the airport. "It was wobbling," she said. "It wasn’t flying slow and steady. The wings weren’t stable the way you’d expect. And I thought, ‘What is going on up there?’ " Mary Miller, Vice President of Associates of Vietnam Veterans of America

Johnstown, Pa., airport director Joe McKelvey called 911 as Flight 93 passed overhead. The plane kept going lower and there was no radio contact. Los Angeles Times

And last not least, Dennis Fritz! - who claimed somewhere else that UA 93 did not overfly Johnstown The plane passed over Johnstown veering south, Fritz said. Akron Beacon Journal Note that Fritz confirms Mary Miller's observation here that the plane turned south right over Johnstown!

So the evidence is overwhelming that UA 93 did indeed fly over Johnstown, in spite of Fritz' various denials. Fritz' credibility is seriously damaged by his own contradictions, which is very significant because he is the only one who supports the official flight path: UA 93 approaching Johnstown from southwest, creating a flat bulge.

The many Johnstown witnesses are strong corroboration for two UA 93's over Pennsylvania:

UA-93-South passed Pittsburgh along the Washington/Allegheny County line and was lost from radar (transition A) somewhere southeast of Pittsburgh.

UA-93-North passed north of Pittsburgh, turned on the transponder (transition B), approached Johnstown from northwest and turned south over Johnstown.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Maha Mantra
post Jul 6 2011, 01:17 AM
Post #59





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 70
Joined: 29-April 07
Member No.: 1,004



I'm sorry if I offended Colin and that's why he left.
It might be the fact that he said there were more possible hijacks coming from Europe, I guess to explain the repositioning of the scrambled two fighters over the ocean, but doesn't have an answer why more than two fighters weren't scrambled with such fears in mind.
If the flight computers can be hacked from remote locations, someone would think there could be a huge event in the works requiring massive aerial deployment. Even if not, once two towers were hit, why wouldn't there be hundreds of fighters put up across the country ? Cuz we knew dem hijackers were only interested in the East Coast ? Specifically two unwanted buildings that would cost billions to disassemble and one that had been prepared for the occasion for two years ? Well, maybe we just didn't hear about a massive deployment for security reasons.

I thought the story said UA 93 taxied over to a NASA building and the passengers were evacuated into it.

Northwoods had CIA agents with highly developed aliases for the passengers.

Could modified aircraft have been substituted at an earlier time (explaining the seemingly super-performance) eliminating the need to swap aircraft or get rid of bodies outside the aircraft impacts, and the odd flight manuevering have been involved with the war-games to eliminate alarm from the Air Force, who may not have even known whether these aircraft were real or simulated ?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Quest
post Jul 6 2011, 07:54 PM
Post #60





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,419
Joined: 23-October 06
Member No.: 145



Haven't read the entire thread but IMHO, "aircraft swap" infers plains hit everywhere on 911. We already know that didn't happen in Shanksville in the infamous "gash", nor did a plane hit the Pentagon. Interesting that the Operation Northwoods ABC story with James Bamford came out coveniantly when it did to support a plane swap and Ruppert Murdoch gave us a 'gift' with the season premier of the "Lone Gunman" featuring a "radio controlled plane" about to hit the WTC.

I hate to be a party pooper but "plane swaps" are a red herring.

This post has been edited by Quest: Jul 6 2011, 08:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

7 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th December 2014 - 08:04 PM