A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Yep - 9-11 attacks predicted in 1994



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11  
Old April 13th 04, 11:16 PM
copertopkiller
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete" wrote in message
...

"copertopkiller" wrote

Naaa...you go ahead. You're the one making the claim that they should

have
been successful.


I did not introduce speeds and distance into this tread, you did. So if

you
care to be taken seriously that your introduction has any pertinent

validity
into my disscussion of procedures not being followed I suggest you do

so.

Speed & distance has *everything* to do with aerial intercepts. If you
cannot understand that basic fact, there is no help for you.


Speed and distance that intercepts need to travel have nothing to do with
procedures not being followed. This is a fact that you do not aseem to
comprehend or be able to refute with data and/or by "reputable" cites.

You were requested to supply the specifics and incorporate them into your
statement anyway. You haven't and cannot be taken seriously.



Your earlier question of "Can you explain why then with armed AC and AA
bateries available none where successful or used at all?" would seem to
point to something 'sinister'.

They were not successful in intercepting the hijacked AC
Why?
Either they did not a) launch early enough, or b) fly fast enough
Why not?

That is the question...
Was it some grand design conspiracy in the
identification/authorization/launch/intercept process?
Or was it considered to be a standard hijacking? (In which case alert jets
were not always launched)


The timelines are differing and numerous, moron. Furthermore why do I

need
to show you or anyone else what alert birds were able to intercept when
everybody knows none did?


If none did, and that is what they were supposed to do....then why didn't
they?
You're the one making the claim. Fess up, son.



I have made a claim that is widely known, moron.



please note the word 'reputable'


Please not the word "strawman".


I insert the word reputable, because a grand conspiracy theorist such as
yourself would be prone to use junk information, such as "they WERE

notified
hours before, but bushman told them not to launch until it was too late"

Pete


If I was to use junk information, why would such a person as yourself who
hasn't provided "reputable" information himself or even sufficiently
classified what would be reputable be questioning anyone?



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS : Boeing 747 for terror attacks !!!! Bruno Beam Aviation Marketplace 0 December 20th 04 12:46 AM
on average 17 attacks on US forces a day Jim Military Aviation 0 October 15th 03 08:06 PM
(Translated article) Saipan attacks by IJAAF, November 1944 Gernot Hassenpflug Military Aviation 7 October 8th 03 04:23 PM
Bu$h Jr's Iran-Contra -- The Pentagone's Reign of Terror PirateJohn Military Aviation 1 September 6th 03 10:05 AM
Records Show Hill, Air Force Officials Knew of Attacks Otis Willie Military Aviation 0 August 24th 03 11:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.