FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
9/11 Deja Vu : The Audios. The Analysis.
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 34, 35, 36, 37  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 5:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i also like how war criminal fintan dunne continues to snarkily say:
"yes, yes, it would be great to expose prior knowledge of the 2005 tsunami.. if ONLY there was SOME EVIDENCE that they had prior knowledge"

lmao -- the evidence has fucking built to the point where you would have accepted it as fact by now, if you didn't already claim that it was a BS story. now if you admit it's true you'll look bad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3167
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Mon Aug 08, 2011 11:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

O.k...

Anyhow, anyone interested in the Nazi
issue should check out "the Crime and Punishment
Of I.G. Farben"Slightly surface level but
still an eye opening read.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Thu Dec 29, 2011 10:09 am    Post subject: Re:How they pulled it off audio show 5/5/2010 Reply with quote

Hi,interesting audio there.Just one problem with Fintan's analysis for a remote or cruise missile techno swap found in no less a place than on the 911myths site:

Quote:
Central to many "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories is the idea that hijackers weren't controlling the 4 ill-fated
flights involved in the attacks. Instead there was some sort of remote system guiding the aircraft to their targets.
How might this work? Lets look at the options:


Waaay too much to copy here so here's the conclusion:

Quote:
With modern technology, almost anything is possible; certainly "robo-jets" are possible. The purpose of this essay
was to show that taking over an airliner via "remote control" is not as easy as The Lone Gunmen pilot episode
made it look. There is no button a ground controller can push to magically take control of an airplane. But, even if
there was, the pilots could thwart the takeover attempt by killing the power anyways.
If I was planning a conspiracy that would involve taking over airliners and crashing them into predetermined
targets, I might choose a 777 or an Airbus A330/340. These are FBW aircraft, so you can't simply remove
electrical power if you want control of the airplane. I might also use a DC-10 or a 747 Classic, no EICAS to
worry about. To me, the 757/767 is simply the worst choice as a "robojet", unless you completely redesigned the
plane.
I hope this essay has been helpful. The difficulty of turning an airliner into a cruise missile is probably common
sense for most sensible folks; but I think it’s an important topic as it relates to 9/11, so I decided to tackle it from a
technical standpoint. The information presented on the aircrafts systems is accurate, as it’s summarized from the
"Description and Operation" sections of the 757/767 Maintenance Manuals. Thanks to Mike W for inviting me to
write this for his wonderful site. Also, thanks to Bogglehead from the ScrewLooseChange blog, who got me
thinking about this topic in the first place. Feel free to contact me with any suggestions or questions at :
apathoid@earthlink.net.


http://www.911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf


I'd certainly like to hear what you guys make of all this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 822
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Having a remote controlled guided plane would be far easier than to have pilots on a personal note. I think the evidence speaks for itself regarding the pilot issue in any event.

One pretty good (as far as I can observe?) video is a european one I saw sometime ago but I honestly cannot remember if I saw it on BFN first. In any event, its short and to the point. This seems to be a great video (but I am unsure of the source webpage (ex fake, etc):

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big Boss wrote:
Having a remote controlled guided plane would be far easier than to have pilots on a personal note. I think the evidence speaks for itself regarding the pilot issue in any event.

One pretty good (as far as I can observe?) video is a european one I saw sometime ago but I honestly cannot remember if I saw it on BFN first. In any event, its short and to the point. This seems to be a great video (but I am unsure of the source webpage (ex fake, etc):



Thanks BB, I'll check out the timing claims first in the Commission Report before I look further.I agree it would be easier for remote or programmed planes,but what of the passengers,crew,black box and phone recordings wouldn't they re-complicate the task?

Did you read the full pdf btw?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Big Boss



Joined: 04 May 2008
Posts: 822
Location: Outer Heaven

PostPosted: Fri Dec 30, 2011 11:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Your welcome and not yet newspeak but I definitely saved it so I can get started. I really have to choose my readings wisely these days lol.

Honestly, I am not up to speed on the many facts surrounding the planes, passengers, etc. I'd have to strongly speculate that anything technical (phone calls, etc) could be faked/edited but I am not sure if that was the case on 9/11. Black Boxes? Well I speculate that they would be very easy to "dispose of" lol. Just look at the many other mysterious crashes where foul play has been strongly suspected (especially the JFK Jr Tragedy where the battery apparently died) I simply do not know nor do I have a concrete opinion on it. I mean if I start thinking I'd probably wonder what of any crew or passengers. Much more research would have to do checked out.

Lets say we go with the remote theory. If we accept there were passengers, then it seems to make sense that those passengers had a flight crew (would be odd otherwise no?) yet at the same time, we have a plane that has no need for a flight crew (being remote controlled) and if there is no flight crew, then how does the existence of passengers work on a plane that potentially has no flight crew? Perhaps there could have been a crew that believed they were in control of the plane? (I am purely speculating this entire post lol) In any event just more to read and study ultimately.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 7:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big Boss wrote:
Your welcome and not yet newspeak but I definitely saved it so I can get started. I really have to choose my readings wisely these days lol.


LOL tell me about it! Since I've fairly recently emerged from the smog that is the truth movement some things become a lot clearer.

Big Boss wrote:

Honestly, I am not up to speed on the many facts surrounding the planes, passengers, etc. I'd have to strongly speculate that anything technical (phone calls, etc) could be faked/edited but I am not sure if that was the case on 9/11. Black Boxes? Well I speculate that they would be very easy to "dispose of" lol. Just look at the many other mysterious crashes where foul play has been strongly suspected (especially the JFK Jr Tragedy where the battery apparently died) I simply do not know nor do I have a concrete opinion on it. I mean if I start thinking I'd probably wonder what of any crew or passengers. Much more research would have to do checked out.

Lets say we go with the remote theory. If we accept there were passengers, then it seems to make sense that those passengers had a flight crew (would be odd otherwise no?) yet at the same time, we have a plane that has no need for a flight crew (being remote controlled) and if there is no flight crew, then how does the existence of passengers work on a plane that potentially has no flight crew? Perhaps there could have been a crew that believed they were in control of the plane? (I am purely speculating this entire post lol) In any event just more to read and study ultimately.


If there are passengers there has to be a crew.
As the remote_takeover pdf implies:
If there is a crew any remote type system can be disabled easily by various actions available to them.

I think my reluctance to even think suicide hijackers actually might have done it,led me down quite a few dead ends over the years.Where this remote type theory falls down seems to be in the complications involved.

I don't like the hijackers done it scenario at all,but it's where I'm headed atm.
I do wonder if they practised on a professional flight simulator,and if so where that would be exactly!

Going to check those timings in the video now.

Thanks BB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

newspeak wrote:
I don't like the hijackers done it scenario at all,but it's where I'm headed atm. I do wonder if they practised on a professional flight simulator,and if so where that would be exactly!

'They' (the 'hijackers') did pay for and get training on proper, licensed sophisticated simulators at flight schools all over Florida.

A few of them were living in properties that were owned by FBI informers, and had drivers licenses giving their addresses as accommodation on nearby US air bases and such IIRC.

This was covered in the MSM to a degree and also by Hopsicker et al. Wink

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sat Dec 31, 2011 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Continuity wrote:
newspeak wrote:
I don't like the hijackers done it scenario at all,but it's where I'm headed atm. I do wonder if they practised on a professional flight simulator,and if so where that would be exactly!

'They' (the 'hijackers') did pay for and get training on proper, licensed sophisticated simulators at flight schools all over Florida.

A few of them were living in properties that were owned by FBI informers, and had drivers licenses giving their addresses as accommodation on nearby US air bases and such IIRC.

This was covered in the MSM to a degree and also by Hopsicker et al. Wink


LOL I just typed '9/11 hijackers had flight sim training' into my fav search engine and this came up:

(sorry it's a c&p direct from the pdf)

http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_4.pdf

Quote:
Pilot Training
To successfully complete the 9/11 plot aboard the aircraft, at least one member of the
team had to be able to pilot the plane, naviga te it to the desired location, and direct it into
the intended target. These tasks required extensive training and preparation.
FAA records show that four of the 19 hijackers—one aboard each flight—possessed FAA
certificates as qualified pilots. FAA certification required that a candidate complete a
requisite amount of flight training and pass both a written exam and practical skills test.
Each of the four pilots received flight training in the United States, which is recognized
as having one of the world’s most advanced pilot training education and certification
system in the world, and trains many pilots from many nations.
Among the five hijackers of American Airlines Flight 11, only Mohammed Atta held a
certificate from the FAA as a qualified private and commercial pilot, including
Staff Statement No. 4 5
proficiency rating in multi-engine aircraft operation. Atta received his commercial pilot
certificate in December, 2000. Records indicate that Atta received Boeing flight
simulator training sessions.
According to experts questioned by Commission staff, simulator training was critical for
the hijacker to familiarize himself with the cockpit controls and proper operation of the
Boeing 757 and 767—the type hijacked on 9/11, and to gain the operational proficiency,
“feel,” and confidence necessary to fly the aircraft into an intended target.
Among the five hijackers aboard United Airlines flight 175, only Marwan al Shehhi is
known to have completed flight training and possessed an FAA pilot certification. Al
Shehhi received his commercial pilot certificate in December, 2000, on the same day and
at the same facility as Atta received his. He also had Boeing flight simulator training.
Among the five hijackers aboard American Airlines Flight 77, Hani Hanjour was the sole
individual who FAA records show completed flight training and received FAA pilot
certification. Hanjour received his commercial multi-engine pilot certificate from the
FAA in March 1999. He received extensive flight training in the United States including
flight simulator training, and was perhaps the most experienced and highly trained pilot
among the 9/11 hijackers.
Among the four hijackers aboard United Airlines Flight 93, Ziad Jarrah was the lone
individual who is recorded as having received flight training and FAA pilot certification.
Jarrah received his private pilot certificate from the FAA in November, 2000, and was
recorded as having received Boeing flight simulator training. Staff would note that Jarrah
had logged only 100 flight hours, and did not possess a commercial pilot certificate or
multi-engine rating.
The staff would note the existence of computer-based software programs that provides
cockpit simulation available on the open market to the general public. According to
experts at the FAA such computer-based training packages, including products that
simulate cockpit controls of the Boeing 757 and 767, provided effective training
opportunities. The terrorists were known to use computers, and there is no reason to
believe they did not have the computer literacy necessary to take advantage of computerbased
training aids.
Flying the Aircraft
Although the investigation is still ongoing into what methods the hijackers employed to
navigate and direct the aircraft toward their target, the following information is offered in
regard to this analysis.
Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft are outfitted with highly capable flight management systems
and auto pilot features. Knowledge of these systems could be gained through simulator
training, readily available operational manuals, and, perhaps, PC-based simulator
Staff Statement No. 4 6
software. Information from the flight recorder recovered from Flight 77 indicated that
the pilot had input auto-pilot instructions for a route to Reagan National Airport.
It should be noted that the Flight Management Computer could be programmed in such a
manner that it would navigate the aircraft automatically to a location of the hijackers’
choosing, not merely a commercial airport, at a speed and altitude they desired, provided
the hijackers possessed the precise positioning data necessary. By using sequenced
waypoints dialed into the computer, the hijackers could also approach the target from the
direction they wanted.
Financial records indicate that one of the hijackers had purchased a global positioning
system perhaps for the purpose of acquiring precise positioning data on al Qaeda’s 9/11
targets. They had also purchased a Boeing flight deck video and flight simulator
software program. Flight manuals were also found among their belongings.
The Commission continues to acquire and ana lyze data on pilot training, operational
requirements, flight information, and other relevant evidence that will provide the most
informed theory of what means the hijackers used to fly the aircraft to their targets.
Whether the hijackers flew the aircraft manually, engaged the flight management
computer to take them to a programmed destination, or employed some combination of
the two, experts consulted by the Commission believe it quite credible that, given the
certificates held by the hijackers, the training and educational opportunities available to
them through publicly available flight operations manuals and computer-based flight
training software, the hijackers—particularly Atta, Hanjour, and al Shehhi—had the
know-how to complete the mission.


I'd like to keep away from the many "truth" leaders from now on Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess I should have excluded Fintan from the list of those not to listen to Wink

A great deal of very good info to confirm in the audio clips here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Raphael



Joined: 20 Aug 2007
Posts: 1337
Location: SpaceTimeVibration

PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 7:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MichaelC wrote:
Let's not get too involved again in the "How" - we all have a general idea of how it was done and nobody (outside of the original operatives) will ever know for sure EXACTLY how it was done.

What is more important is the "Who" and the "Why".


I agree.
HOW has been disputed by 'experts' on both sides of the equation.
Nobody seems to be a winner.

But discussing WHO and WHY points to an inside job.

If it was the terrorists why bother attacking prior to the buildings being full of infidels?
Why not wait another hour?

If it was the terrorists how would they have know exactly when to turn off their transponders re: radar dead spots?

If it was the terrorists how could they have gained entry to WTC 1, WTC2, and WTC7 to plant the explosives necessary for demolition?

Where would I start an investigation?
Larry the Liar Silverstein would be a prime suspect, possibbly belonging to a 'group', who had MOTIVE and ACCESS to the site prior to the attacks.

It has been 10 years and the American Military Complex has been kicking butt in the middle east. Why have these evil geniuses not retaliated stateside?

They must have known America would fight back?
Why have the evil Islamic geniuses not responded?

They must be planning another attack against the 'infidels' that minimizes civilian casualties. Laughing

namaste

_________________
KEY 528=Swastika=ancient Spherical Standing Wave Theory
“A theory is more impressive the greater is the simplicity of its premise, the more different are the kinds of things it relates and the more extended its range of applicability…”
-Albert Einstein
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
newspeak



Joined: 11 Dec 2011
Posts: 14
Location: UK

PostPosted: Tue Jan 03, 2012 2:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

They planted explosives as well as flying planes into the towers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 34, 35, 36, 37  Next
Page 35 of 37

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.