Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Group of pilots disputes question official version of 9/11
The Portugal News ^ | 8/3/02 | The Portugal News

Posted on 08/29/2002 1:41:13 PM PDT by DrLiberty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last
This conclusion has been seconded by a UK columnist for the UK Daily Mail, John Carlin.

http://the-news.net/cgi-bin/story.pl?title=UK%20press%20back%20THE%20NEWS%20on%20Sep%2011%20attack&edition=666

1 posted on 08/29/2002 1:41:13 PM PDT by DrLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
And the moon is made of cheese.
2 posted on 08/29/2002 1:44:53 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
bump
3 posted on 08/29/2002 1:45:03 PM PDT by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
Heeebully Beeebully! Ya'll got yerselves a reee-port.

This dopey article is wrong on so many issues I'm thinking that somebody remotely controlled the reporter's typewriter just to make him look like an idiot.

Do they have typewriters in Portugal?

4 posted on 08/29/2002 1:46:57 PM PDT by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
"after deliberating non-stop for 72 hours"

That was the clincher for me. Sheesh. This belongs over on the American hating DU webshiite....

5 posted on 08/29/2002 1:47:00 PM PDT by eureka!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
He said that all the evidence points to the fact that the pilots and their crews had not taken any evasive action to resist the supposed hijackers. They had not attempted any sudden changes in flight path or nose-dive procedures - which led him to believe that they had no control over their aircraft.

Perhaps the pilots were dead before it occurred to them that the planes were doomed and they should take those actions.

6 posted on 08/29/2002 1:48:30 PM PDT by syriacus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
And the moon is made of cheese.

Yes, and a 737 has nowhere near the range to get from Edwards (Los Angeles area) to South Australia....hell, even 747's have been known to have to come to ground for fuel before they even get as far as Sydney...and southern Oz is another hour beyond.

7 posted on 08/29/2002 1:49:46 PM PDT by ErnBatavia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dead
Care to list any of these many things that were wrong about the article or are you just going to be a nattering nabob?
8 posted on 08/29/2002 1:50:24 PM PDT by DrLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
During the press conference Captain Hill maintained that the four airliners must have been choreographed by an Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS).

Oh yeah, they had one of those.

Idiots.

9 posted on 08/29/2002 1:52:04 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Here's another version of that "remote control" B.S.
10 posted on 08/29/2002 1:52:23 PM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
The report seriously questions whether or not the suspect hijackers, supposedly trained on Cessna light aircraft, could have located a target dead-on 200 miles from take off point.

GPS. Flight Management Systems. Simulators.

Actually, the two WTC hijackers nearly collided over the water while on the "final approach" to the Twin Towers. They weren't THAT good.

It further throws into doubt their ability to master the intricacies of the instrument flight rules (IFR) in the 45 minutes from take off to the point of impact.

They weren't "in the system," i.e., flying according to IFR. The day was VMC (visual meteorological conditions), or severe clear. Just because commercial airlines are required to fly under IFR doesn't mean that a hijacker of a commercial airline is gonna follow the rules! Sheesh.

A further question raised by the inquiry was why none of the pilots concerned had alerted ground control. It stated that all pilots are trained to punch a four-digit code into the flight control’s transponder to warn ground control crews of a hijacking - but this did not happen.

Because they were dead.

And for good measure, I'm sure the hijackers either popped the circuit breakers for the transponder or just turned it off.

11 posted on 08/29/2002 1:52:33 PM PDT by bootless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
They didn't HAVE an AWACs. It is completely possible they took over the aircraft when they got to NYC.
12 posted on 08/29/2002 1:53:09 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
Roosevelt’s duplicity in deceiving Americans about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour, which triggered the US entry into WWll.

So..this writer thinks we should not have gone to war with Japan at the time we did? Does he think Roosevelt planned the attack on Pearl Harbor with the Japanese?

At any rate, if we delayed declaring war after Pearl Harbor, we might have lost the war with Japan.

13 posted on 08/29/2002 1:54:20 PM PDT by syriacus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia
Nevetheless, the test (using whatever aircraft) was done over the Pacific. That has been verified. And it is possible.
14 posted on 08/29/2002 1:54:39 PM PDT by DrLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
So it was a conspiracy of the military-industrial complex to justify a war with Iraq?
I threw one of my wife's friends out my house for spouting such anti-American, Leftist BS.
15 posted on 08/29/2002 1:57:45 PM PDT by Spruce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
The fact it is possible means nothing.
16 posted on 08/29/2002 1:58:07 PM PDT by AppyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
Oh it's possible - but I don't think with a 737.
17 posted on 08/29/2002 1:59:05 PM PDT by ErnBatavia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: dighton
A group of military and civilian US pilots, under the chairmanship of Colonel Donn de Grand, after deliberating non-stop for 72 hours, has concluded that the flight crews of the four passenger airliners, involved in the September 11th tragedy, had no control over their aircraft.

Yup. I always make my best and most informed judgements on three days' worth of sleep deficit.

18 posted on 08/29/2002 1:59:27 PM PDT by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
Ten bucks says this thread - much like the one about Dubya being the master of disguise - doesn't make it to 5:00 Central time either.
19 posted on 08/29/2002 1:59:38 PM PDT by Xenalyte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DrLiberty
Bunk!

1. There were calls from flight 93 describing the hijacking. Unless, of course, the military had some Arabs with knives as patsies to pretend to take over the plane.

2. Flight 77 (Pentagon) took a round-about course in the DC area. No reason to do that if it is controlled from the ground. The pilot was looking for a target, and I don't think that it was originally the Pentagon.

3. It isn't that difficult to fly a plane. Pilots earn the big bucks safely landing a plane in a driving rainstorm with a nasty cross wind. Flying on a perfectly clear day when you don't give a damn about flight lanes or clearing your flight into the 2nd and 3rd tallest buildings in the country with air traffic control isn't hard.

He said that all the evidence points to the fact that the pilots and their crews had not taken any evasive action to resist the supposed hijackers. They had not attempted any sudden changes in flight path or nose-dive procedures - which led him to believe that they had no control over their aircraft.

4. Before 9/11, the rule was "If a hijacker wants the plane, he gets the plane. No reason for people to die just to prevent him from going to Cuba." You just let the nice Arab man have the plane and let the authorities on the ground worry about getting the passengers and crew out safely. It wasn't until September 12 that the rule became "Anyone who tries to take the plane will die. If that means everyone else dies too, then so be it." (Except, of course, you can't arm the pilots. That would be dangerous for the passengers.)

Idiots!!

20 posted on 08/29/2002 2:00:08 PM PDT by KarlInOhio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-171 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson