View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby Scepcop » 04 Apr 2010, 14:26

My post in abovetopsecret forum:

Originally posted by rush969

Continuing...

- NORAD failed to intercept four airliners off course on 9/11, which was impossible according to their standard 24/7 procedures.

I don´t think you or I know NORAD´s standard 24/7 procedures in detail.
This looks more like rewritting something you´ve read over and over someplace and you´re somehow convinced that NORAD´s 24/7 procedures weren´t followed that day.


No I don't know their standard procedures. But those who worked for NORAD do. Their tactical director came out and said all this. See: http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html

Also, veteran air traffic controllers like Robin Hordon did too. See also the same link or his interview in "Zero An Investigation into 9/11".

Here is what Robin Hordon said: (remember he is an authority on NORAD, not you!)

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html
Statement to this website 4/10/07: "I knew within hours of the attacks on 9/11/2001 that it was an inside job. Based on my 11-year experience as an FAA Air Traffic Controller in the busy Northeast corridor, including hundreds of hours of training, briefings, air refuelings, low altitude bombing drills, being part of huge military exercises, daily military training exercises, interacting on a routine basis directly with NORAD radar personnel, and based on my own direct experience dealing with in-flight emergency situations, including two instances of hijacked commercial airliners, I state unequivocally; There is absolutely no way that four large commercial airliners could have flown around off course for 30 to 60 minutes on 9/11 without being intercepted and shot completely out of the sky by our jet fighters unless very highly placed people in our government and our military wanted it to happen.

It is important for people to understand that scrambling jet fighters to intercept aircraft showing the signs of experiencing "IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES" such as going off course without authorization, losing a transponder signal and/or losing radio contact is a common and routine task executed jointly between the FAA and NORAD controllers. The entire "national defense-first responder" intercept system has many highly-trained civilian and military personnel who are committed and well-trained to this task. FAA and NORAD continuously monitor our skies and fighter planes and pilots are on the ready 24/7 to handle these situations. Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem.

This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. ...


He further states:

Article 3/12/07: "When it became clear that there hadn't been a systems failure of any kind on the morning of September 11th, Hordon was certain that something had gone terribly wrong within the upper echelons of authority. A pilot (third level air carrier) as well as an ATC, he is well versed on in-flight emergency protocol. He is also adamant that if these procedures had been followed on 9/11 not one of the hijacked planes would have reached their targets.

"I'm sorry but American 11 should have been intercepted over southwest Connecticut—bang, done deal." ...

The unfathomable delays seen in military action on 9/11 are inconceivable to those who have painstakingly investigated the matter -- and for a man who worked for years keeping air travel over the U.S. safe. ...


There, those are the analyses from an authority on the subject, not an armchair quarterback like you!

Of course, this doesn't mean it was an inside job. It only means that the government LET it happen or allowed it to happen as an excuse to get into war. It's the "they knew about it and let it happen" hypothesis, which most Americans agree with at least, even if they don't believe it was an inside job.

Is that too hard for you to buy?

Listen to his key words here. Pay attention:

"Based on my 11-year experience as an FAA Air Traffic Controller in the busy Northeast corridor, including hundreds of hours of training, briefings, air refuelings, low altitude bombing drills, being part of huge military exercises, daily military training exercises, interacting on a routine basis directly with NORAD radar personnel, and based on my own direct experience dealing with in-flight emergency situations, including two instances of hijacked commercial airliners, I state unequivocally; There is absolutely no way that four large commercial airliners could have flown around off course for 30 to 60 minutes on 9/11 without being intercepted and shot completely out of the sky by our jet fighters unless very highly placed people in our government and our military wanted it to happen."

Also, here is what NORAD tactical director Capt. Daniel Davis had to say about it:

http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html
Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could!


Again, don't you think a NORAD officer would know BETTER than a pure conjecturist like you?

You agree that people who work for or with NORAD know more about it than you, right? Agreed?

Good. Then please humble yourself!
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29






Re: Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby Nostradamus » 04 Apr 2010, 21:05

Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem.

This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. ...


I would love for someone to give an example of this. The 10 to 15 minute claim is absurd. Let's see why. Jets are not allowed to produce sonic booms over the US. That sets a limit to how fast the jet can fly. The speed of sound varies depending up on the air qualities, but is close to 768 miles per hour. In 15 minutes a jet, assuming that it is at that speed on the runway, is able to fly 192 miles. The ten minute claim is that the jet is within 128 miles of its target.

For this claim to be true it means that at the instant a problem is reported, that the target must be within 128 to 192 of a jet ready to instantly take off. NOT TRUE. There are not hundreds or thousands of jets sprinkled across the US in a fine pattern with hundreds or thousands of pilots on board ready to take off and intercept a plane in 10 to 15 minutes.

This also assumes that the positions of the targets are known.

From http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/oct99/crash26.htm
The FAA said air traffic controllers lost radio contact with the plane at 9:44 a.m., just after they had cleared the twin-engine jet to climb to 39,000 feet northwest of Gainesville, Fla. An FAA spokesman said that air traffic controllers noted "significant changes in altitude" by the plane, but that the aircraft's crew did not respond to repeated radio calls from the ground.

Pentagon officials said the military began its pursuit of the ghostly civilian aircraft at 10:08 a.m., when two Air Force F-16 fighters from Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida that were on a routine training mission were asked by the FAA to intercept it. The F-16s did not reach the Learjet, but an Air Force F-15 fighter from Eglin Air Force Base in Florida that also was asked to locate it got within sight of the aircraft and stayed with it from 11:09 a.m. to 11:44 a.m., when the military fighter was diverted to St. Louis for fuel.


From this we see that the pursuit was started 24 minutes after loss of radio contact. That's 2x the 10 to 15 minute claim and that's not even reaching the plane, but starting! The intercept was made 85 minutes after radio contact was lost. This is a plane which still has a transponder on and a plane that is in continuous radar contact with the ground.

Notice too that this was 1999, before 2001. This event is also before people start thinking that hijackers are planning to use planes as missiles.

The military aircraft were not armed with air-to-air missiles, and Pentagon officials said they never considered shooting down the Learjet.


So these planes were not able to do a shoot down.

There, those are the analyses from an authority on the subject, not an armchair quarterback like you!

This argument is based on an appeal to authority. This post was made by someone with a series of claims that could have been checked out as I did here. It seems rather clear that the claims are suspect with a claim of 10 to 15 minute response. That claim alone makes this post rather suspect. There just are not enough military aircraft in existence to cover the US with that sort of capability.

When we look at an actual case we see that the initiation of the intercept was much longer than the claim. We see that 2 of the planes failed to intercept, but a third did and that intercept was over 1 hour into the flight.

I'll bet the person posting the claim wasn't even an air traffic controller. A real controller would know that the claims being posted are not physically possible.

Good. Then please humble yourself!

Take the time to do some research. See if the claim makes sense. In this case the claims turnout not to make sense.
Scimitars were not available - beware January 19, 2038 is upon us.
User avatar
Nostradamus
 
Posts: 1761
Joined: 08 Aug 2009, 14:08

Re: Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby NucleicAcid » 05 Apr 2010, 02:39

NORAD's purpose from inception was basically to protect US airspace, especially against long-range Soviet nuclear bomber aircraft. So, at that point in time, they would have been ready to scramble within a moment's notice. I don't doubt that during that period of time, they would have been able to get aircraft in the air within 5 minutes (if they weren't already doing rounds), and of course they would have broken the sound barrier over public soil (that's easy enough to circumvent). However, since the threat of Soviet bombers has dropped significantly, it is most likely that the overall response time would have decayed since then. Also, because the idea of hijacking planes and using them as missiles was a rare idea at best (this is pre-911, have to be careful not to fall into hindsight bias), NORAD wouldn't really have much reason to look at commercial aircraft. They'd be looking mostly for anomalous aircraft inbound from offshore. Therefore, they would have had to have waited AT LEAST until they got the notification from the FAA to even begin doing anything. Despite all the drilling, people act totally different during a drill than they do in a real-life situation.

In short, unless the military was on high alert/scramble to begin with, AND got immediate notification from the FAA as soon as the flights deviated off course, it is highly unlikely they would have intercepted the airliners.

The government has a general trend of this: It is silly to suspect malice, when mere ignorance will suffice. I think it is more than likely that the pieces weren't in place for one reason or another, and the system was not ready to handle an intercept. It's possible to say that the entire 911 incident was the result of negligence and miscommunication, passively or perhaps, PERHAPS actively. Conversely, in order for the US to pull off an entirely inside job, they would have had to have flawless planning and communication, and have the entire thing go off without a hitch. I don't give ANY single or group of humans, let alone the US government, the possibility of having something go off without any hitches.
Hey, you there. Yes, you. Read more journal articles.

If what I say sounds like the teacher from Charlie Brown (Wah wahh woohh wuh waah), then you should try college. It's fun, and only costs you your soul and several tens of thousands of dollars. :)

“I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven“ - Richard Wiseman

Let's make directional hypotheses, test them repeatedly, replicate experiments, and publish results! Yay, science!
User avatar
NucleicAcid
 
Posts: 169
Joined: 26 Mar 2010, 04:20

Re: Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby ProfWag » 05 Apr 2010, 03:24

SCEPCOP, I have told you before, and I will tell you again. I have a family member who was the #2 person in charge of NORAD (Air Force General) as well as a high-level employee of the FAA after that. (I can send you a link to his bio if you insist.) He told me personally that nothing in the conspiracy theories dealing with those planes is true. NOTHING. That includes them being able to make those maneuvers into the Pentagon as well as alluding fighter jets. Would you freakin' listen to me for a change? Please?!?!?!?! My source is credible and relevant. Jeezus H Kriste, give it up!
He is NOT an armchair observer which is exactly what that "Tactical Director" is. He was a simple Captain and a nobody who worked in Milwaukee.
GIVE US A FREAKING BREAK SCEPCOP!!!!!!!!
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby ciscop » 05 Apr 2010, 06:08

yes.. winston..
you got us with that post..

911 was an inside job
we didnt go to the moon
and bigfoot sleeps in your backyard
For every person who reads this valuable book there are hundreds of naïve souls who would prefer to have their spines tingled by a sensational but worthless potboiler by some hack journalist of the paranormal. You who now read these sentences join a small but wiser minority. Martin Gaardner (Psychology of the Psychic)
User avatar
ciscop
 
Posts: 1423
Joined: 22 Jul 2009, 12:04

Re: Skeptics, don't these Pros know more about NORAD than you?

Postby NucleicAcid » 05 Apr 2010, 11:40

Woah, that's some pretty intense family connections.

Now we just need to find someone who is family with someone that landed on the moon, and we're set. :) (we = people that actually believe we landed on the moon, because duh)
Hey, you there. Yes, you. Read more journal articles.

If what I say sounds like the teacher from Charlie Brown (Wah wahh woohh wuh waah), then you should try college. It's fun, and only costs you your soul and several tens of thousands of dollars. :)

“I agree that by the standards of any other area of science that remote viewing is proven“ - Richard Wiseman

Let's make directional hypotheses, test them repeatedly, replicate experiments, and publish results! Yay, science!
User avatar
NucleicAcid
 
Posts: 169
Joined: 26 Mar 2010, 04:20


Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests