On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 14:43:05 GMT, "copertopkiller"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 05:51:19 GMT, "copertopkiller"
wrote:


Not true. I will not becuase you more than else have been hammered
with
this
argument.

Not really, Bryan. You've never come close to laying a glove on me.

Yeah, thats difficult to do from behind PC's although I was not thinking
physically but argumentively. It was about FAA Procedures which you claim
myself and others have misconceptions about. You know the procedures
brought
up. Why don't you list the misconceptions? poorboy

Not in any particular order:

Oh my. This is a list of misconceptions about FAA Procedures?

Actually it's a list of your misconceptions, but it includes some of
your misconceptions about FAA procedures.

--Bryan, in a thread titled " JDAM BAM! 9/11 Hot DAMN!":

NORAD could already see a good part of America.


Which was refuted:

Actually they didn't.

snicker

And Bryan proceeds to "answer" me. But as usual, he snips some of my
answers, and twists the remaining words to his own bizarre meanings.
But there is one interesting place that he slipped up:

FAA regulations were followed.
"FAA regulations require NORAD to scramble aircraft in the event of a
hijacking or an emergency."

There are no such regulations. How can FAA regulations require NORAD
to do anything?

True: FAA regulations do not specifically tell NORAD to scramble AC.

So, Bryan, it comes down to this. You claim that if procedures had
been followed on 9/11, the outcome would have been different. Now you
flat out say that there aren't any regulations that require NORAD to
scramble aircraft.... Hoisted on your own petard....