Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post - United 93, opening old wounds and exposing some truth?

Lanny_MacDonald · 06-03-2006, 10:30 AM

How about you take a run at these questions now?

Flight 77 was tracked traveling at a velocity that should have had it hitting the Pentagon at 9:15. It disappeared from radar for some 20 minutes before mysteriously popping up on radar again over Washington, 20 minutes behind its original projected trajectory. Where did it go, and how is it possible that it lost 20 minutes of flight time?

NORAD has the most complex radar net on the planet and openly brags it knows of and can track anything in North American airspace at any time. But somehow it lost track of a 757?

There supposedly wasn’t enough time to scramble fighters to defend the capital. Edwards air force base is 11 miles from the Pentagon. How much time does it take to scramble fighters that are on 24x7 alert? NORAD also knew of high jacked planes at 8:40, so why the huge delay in getting planes in the air?

Flight 77 was supposedly flown by the most incompetent of the arab pilots, Hanjour, yet the plane takes an incredible flight path to hit the Pentagon, flying past it, then doing a 270 degree turn WHILE dropping 4,000 feet before skimming along the ground and striking the first floor of the Pentagon. No damage to the lawn (so no impact), so he went in cleanly. Pretty impressive flying for a guy who couldn’t land a Cessna. How it possible that Hanjour could have pulled off this flying maneuver that many experienced military pilots could not? This maneuver would have either stalled the engines or slammed the plane into the ground.

Why would Hanjour decide to take this course? The people that perpetrated this plot were supposedly highly intelligent and well informed. It is widely known that the east wing of the Pentagon houses all the brass, so why strike the wing as far away from there? If al Qaeda had been observing their targets they would have known that the west wing was under renovation and no one but civilian workers were there. That would have been no target. The correct target would have been directly in on the flight path the plane was on, not the sweeping 270 degree turn with a sudden drop in altitude. Why this obvious error in targeting?

The Pentagon is protected by several missile batteries designed to take out any air threat. Only planes with military transponders are considered a non-threat. Why did this system fail?

Finally, the Pentagon is one of the most secure above ground buildings in the world. It has some of the most sophisticated video monitoring systems available, yet the best they can produce as evidence of the attack is two manipulated videos from a parking lot.

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/A...23May2006.html

Where are the other videos that would conclusively prove once and for all what hit the Pentagon. Speaking from experience, you do not release evidence that is damning to your cause unless directed to do so. There are supposed to be another 84 angles of this incident, all of them shot with ultra-high resolution cameras at 30 fps, so why is this footage not being released? If they are confident that their story is true, why not just release the video and put it to bed. If the “conspiracy theory” is a house of cards, why not destroy it by releasing the video?

Call me a skeptic or a whacko or what ever it takes to let you sleep at night, but I refuse to believe anything that doesn’t have realistic proof behind it. When you have experts and academics question the story for its plausibility I think there is something there. This subject is no longer on the fringe and owned by the “nut jobs”. 70 million Americans believe the books were cooked and want 9/11 reinvestigated. That means they believe that the conspiracy theory cooked up by the government (and it is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, equally as implausible as many of those floating around the web) is not convincing. There are too many holes in the story. Way too many “coincidences” to have happened for there not to be more to this. Do I know what happened? Nope. But I certainly don’t believe the story that has been floated to this point. There is too much evidence to support something else going on. I’ll continue to wait until the trail either goes cold or consensus can be reached.

06-03-2006, 10:30 AM	#284
Lanny_MacDonald Lifetime Suspension Join Date: Oct 2001 Exp:	How about you take a run at these questions now? Flight 77 was tracked traveling at a velocity that should have had it hitting the Pentagon at 9:15. It disappeared from radar for some 20 minutes before mysteriously popping up on radar again over Washington, 20 minutes behind its original projected trajectory. Where did it go, and how is it possible that it lost 20 minutes of flight time? NORAD has the most complex radar net on the planet and openly brags it knows of and can track anything in North American airspace at any time. But somehow it lost track of a 757? There supposedly wasn’t enough time to scramble fighters to defend the capital. Edwards air force base is 11 miles from the Pentagon. How much time does it take to scramble fighters that are on 24x7 alert? NORAD also knew of high jacked planes at 8:40, so why the huge delay in getting planes in the air? Flight 77 was supposedly flown by the most incompetent of the arab pilots, Hanjour, yet the plane takes an incredible flight path to hit the Pentagon, flying past it, then doing a 270 degree turn WHILE dropping 4,000 feet before skimming along the ground and striking the first floor of the Pentagon. No damage to the lawn (so no impact), so he went in cleanly. Pretty impressive flying for a guy who couldn’t land a Cessna. How it possible that Hanjour could have pulled off this flying maneuver that many experienced military pilots could not? This maneuver would have either stalled the engines or slammed the plane into the ground. Why would Hanjour decide to take this course? The people that perpetrated this plot were supposedly highly intelligent and well informed. It is widely known that the east wing of the Pentagon houses all the brass, so why strike the wing as far away from there? If al Qaeda had been observing their targets they would have known that the west wing was under renovation and no one but civilian workers were there. That would have been no target. The correct target would have been directly in on the flight path the plane was on, not the sweeping 270 degree turn with a sudden drop in altitude. Why this obvious error in targeting? The Pentagon is protected by several missile batteries designed to take out any air threat. Only planes with military transponders are considered a non-threat. Why did this system fail? Finally, the Pentagon is one of the most secure above ground buildings in the world. It has some of the most sophisticated video monitoring systems available, yet the best they can produce as evidence of the attack is two manipulated videos from a parking lot. http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/A...23May2006.html Where are the other videos that would conclusively prove once and for all what hit the Pentagon. Speaking from experience, you do not release evidence that is damning to your cause unless directed to do so. There are supposed to be another 84 angles of this incident, all of them shot with ultra-high resolution cameras at 30 fps, so why is this footage not being released? If they are confident that their story is true, why not just release the video and put it to bed. If the “conspiracy theory” is a house of cards, why not destroy it by releasing the video? Call me a skeptic or a whacko or what ever it takes to let you sleep at night, but I refuse to believe anything that doesn’t have realistic proof behind it. When you have experts and academics question the story for its plausibility I think there is something there. This subject is no longer on the fringe and owned by the “nut jobs”. 70 million Americans believe the books were cooked and want 9/11 reinvestigated. That means they believe that the conspiracy theory cooked up by the government (and it is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, equally as implausible as many of those floating around the web) is not convincing. There are too many holes in the story. Way too many “coincidences” to have happened for there not to be more to this. Do I know what happened? Nope. But I certainly don’t believe the story that has been floated to this point. There is too much evidence to support something else going on. I’ll continue to wait until the trail either goes cold or consensus can be reached.