zappaman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Dec-03-11 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #21 |
|
Cool.
Please provide a link.
I'm anxious to see it!
|
| -ACARS Confirmed - 9/11 aircraft airborne long after crash |
JohnyCanuck |
Dec-01-11 04:04 PM |
#0 |
 -
Good job - another "smoking gun" |
hack89 |
Dec-01-11 06:00 PM |
#1 |
  -
not enough to convince adamant skeptics |
spooked911 |
Dec-02-11 09:56 AM |
#5 |
| -
Because you know when the "evidence" is examined carefully it will be found lacking. |
hack89 |
Dec-02-11 11:06 AM |
#9 |
| -
only because your standards of proof are ridiculous |
spooked911 |
Dec-03-11 07:00 PM |
#15 |
| -
Slowpokes are slow |
KDLarsen |
Dec-02-11 03:05 AM |
#2 |
| -
FWIW, the assertion is that we know these messages were received |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-02-11 08:51 AM |
#3 |
| -
An interesting read, thanks for that NT |
KDLarsen |
Dec-02-11 09:26 AM |
#4 |
| -
Hmmm...not that you have a bias or anything |
spooked911 |
Dec-02-11 10:09 AM |
#7 |
| -
no, it doesn't seem clear at all |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-02-11 12:34 PM |
#10 |
| -
I don't follow you. |
spooked911 |
Dec-03-11 07:16 PM |
#17 |
| -
you certainly don't |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-04-11 08:44 AM |
#24 |
| -
Clearly, your baseline assumption is that flight 175 hit the tower and that if any data deviates |
spooked911 |
Dec-04-11 01:43 PM |
#25 |
| -
projection much? |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-04-11 03:14 PM |
#27 |
| -
some responses |
spooked911 |
Dec-05-11 01:06 PM |
#31 |
| -
By the way, it was actually Ballinger who sent the messages |
spooked911 |
Dec-02-11 10:20 AM |
#8 |
| -
you could stand to read more closely... |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-02-11 12:59 PM |
#11 |
| -
radar coverage were likely faked during the wargames going on |
spooked911 |
Dec-02-11 09:58 AM |
#6 |
| -
Primary radar coverage, not the filtered bit ATCO's see N/T |
KDLarsen |
Dec-02-11 03:52 PM |
#12 |
| -
+1000% -- |
defendandprotect |
Dec-03-11 12:18 AM |
#13 |
| -
They would never insert fake contacts into ATC radar |
hack89 |
Dec-03-11 03:32 PM |
#14 |
| -
here we go again |
spooked911 |
Dec-03-11 07:02 PM |
#16 |
| -
What does that have to do with radar injects? |
hack89 |
Dec-03-11 09:30 PM |
#19 |
| -
how then, do you imagine that ATC would know of the exercises? |
spooked911 |
Dec-04-11 01:45 PM |
#26 |
| -
There is no indication that the ATC knew about the exercise |
hack89 |
Dec-06-11 07:52 AM |
#35 |
| -
why would they ask the ATC if this was an exercise if there was no expectation |
spooked911 |
Dec-06-11 11:05 AM |
#36 |
| -
Does it sound for a second like the ATC is confused between real and sim? |
hack89 |
Dec-06-11 11:48 AM |
#37 |
| -
again, though |
spooked911 |
Dec-07-11 07:22 PM |
#38 |
| -
again, though |
zappaman |
Dec-07-11 08:41 PM |
#39 |
| -
Why didn't the ATC say "this is not an exercise" up front? |
hack89 |
Dec-07-11 09:47 PM |
#40 |
| -
on the contrary, it is very credible |
OnTheOtherHand |
Dec-08-11 06:33 AM |
#41 |
| -
Why? |
KDLarsen |
Dec-08-11 11:24 AM |
#42 |
| -
Right, hack |
BeFree |
Dec-03-11 07:28 PM |
#18 |
| -
Well, it would be helpful if you could provide some real evidence |
hack89 |
Dec-03-11 09:33 PM |
#20 |
| -
You don't read much? |
BeFree |
Dec-03-11 09:45 PM |
#21 |
| -
Real evidence? |
zappaman |
Dec-03-11 10:54 PM |
#22 |
| -
So lets see the link |
hack89 |
Dec-04-11 08:24 AM |
#23 |
| -
On 911 they were informed |
Rosa Luxemburg |
Dec-04-11 03:35 PM |
#28 |
| -
Informed of what? nt |
hack89 |
Dec-04-11 04:42 PM |
#30 |
| -
Initially, there were no flights 11 and 77 scheduled |
mrarundale |
Dec-04-11 04:31 PM |
#29 |
| -
Problem with that |
sgsmith |
Dec-05-11 01:39 PM |
#32 |
| -
False |
KDLarsen |
Dec-05-11 03:25 PM |
#33 |
| -
Wow |
zappaman |
Dec-05-11 05:55 PM |
#34 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread