431 replies to this topic

[mrbusdriver]

Q24, on 18 April 2010 - 07:34 PM, said:

What major issues, mrbusdriver?

NASA were conducting unmanned test flights of Boeing aircraft as far back as 1984.  By the time of 9/11, widely available technology in the U.S. had brought accuracy of auto-pilot positional data to within 3 meters.  All needed from there would be a link between the ground and aircraft to programme a course.  I don’t see any great issue in setting an aircraft up with such a link.

There was one B-707 (an old 720 I believe) that was fitted with a pretty rudimentary remote control system, no "datalink" type system which would allow it to use navaids and such. Precise control of the aircraft was pretty rough.
Today's technolgy, with everything so automated and digital, it seems it would be possible to refit aircraft with some type of automation. It would be complex and very expensive, and there's no evidence of such a unmanned control system even being anywhere near a operational state. Maybe some brainstorming, but nothing set to hardware or software.
I don't think it would be a popular concept with the flying public...or pilot's unions...

[Q24]

mrbusdriver, on 18 April 2010 - 07:44 PM, said:

Today's technolgy, with everything so automated and digital, it seems it would be possible to refit aircraft with some type of automation.

I think so too.

[StrayCat]

mrbusdriver, on 18 April 2010 - 05:44 PM, said:

Commercial jetliners (or basically any large civil or military transport) are not equipped nor designed to be flown by remote control. Smaller drones yes, but large planes present a number of major issues in such an application.

Thats not true. Like I said, the declassified Northwoods documents reveal secret plans by the government to hijack commercial airliners by remote control, and that was back in the 60's. Technology has come a long way since then so I cant even imagine what they could do now.

[flyingswan]

StrayCat, on 06 May 2010 - 06:23 PM, said:

Thats not true. Like I said, the declassified Northwoods documents reveal secret plans by the government to hijack commercial airliners by remote control, and that was back in the 60's. Technology has come a long way since then so I cant even imagine what they could do now.

There is an enormous difference in difficulty between the Northwoods idea of flying an airline-type take-off, climb and cruise (no landing required) and the precision guidance required for a 9/11 attack.  As mrbusdriver has correctly stated, a one-off remotely controlled crash-landing was attempted in 1984 with limited success.  This is not something you would want to try for real without a lot of prior testing.
http://www.nasa.gov/...S-003-dfrc.html

[DevilDogPratt]

http://www.debunk911...opics/Main_Page

this will explain everything to you 'truthers' (crazy traitors)

[Agent X]

No it won't. They refuse to believe the official or more rational explanations no matter what the real evidence and will do everything they can to rationalize their points away.

Because of that I've personally come to hate debating with them.

But the more rational people should believe the real evidence, no the trumped up junk these conspiracy cultists come up with.

[Q24]

DevilDogPratt, on 06 May 2010 - 08:15 PM, said:

http://www.debunk911...opics/Main_Page

this will explain everything to you 'truthers' (crazy traitors)

That site doesn’t even explain when Cheney et al came up with the idea.

[DevilDogPratt]

Q24, on 06 May 2010 - 08:34 PM, said:

That site doesn’t even explain when Cheney et al came up with the idea.

sigh...you should be ashamed of yourself for believing such ridiculous things and thinking that the US killed three thousand innocent Americans for no reason whatsoever. its a real slap in the face for victims of the 9/11 attacks.

[DevilDogPratt]

Cristina1, on 16 April 2010 - 10:35 PM, said:

I am still wondering why they destroyed other WTC buildings (not the 2 towers) when they had no damage to them and were further away from the 2 towers than some other buildings who still stand today

you mean this one?


that doesnt look like "no damage" to me

http://debunk911myth...ld_Trade_Center

while im at it, for all of you saying "ZOMG CONTROLLED DEMOLITION IT FELL STRAIGHT DOWN"
or " IT WAZ AN MIZZLE, THERE WERE NO WRECKAGE!!1!!"



and dont even try that "that isnt an aircraft tire" crap. anyone who knows planes will tell you that is  100% an plane's tire

Edited by DevilDogPratt, 06 May 2010 - 09:37 PM.

[Q24]

DevilDogPratt, on 06 May 2010 - 09:16 PM, said:

sigh...you should be ashamed of yourself for believing such ridiculous things and thinking that the US killed three thousand innocent Americans for no reason whatsoever. its a real slap in the face for victims of the 9/11 attacks.

I don’t think “the US killed three thousand innocent Americans for no reason whatsoever”.  I think individuals internal and external to the U.S. who hold certain ideologies determined that the sacrifice was worth the gains.

Do you really think that you’re priceless to these people, DevilDog?  You or even 3,000 people are not an insufferable loss to a country of approximately 300 million and these lives are not so important as the continued pre-eminence of the country itself.  That is the cold, hard fact of the matter in the greater scheme of things – there is no room in these matters for the compassion that you are appealing to.

[olympic1]

theres no doubt 4 commercial planes were hijacked and downed, the real question or the more serious question if you like is how much the goverment knew about the terrorist plans prior to 9/11 .the official story satisfies me that different agences identified that these men were dangerous they were tracking there movments.the fbi knew they were having flying lessons etc... but each department failed to communicate with eachother or at best couldnt put 2 and 2 together,being the first attack  using airplanes as weapons of mass destruction i cant really blame the agencies for not figuring it out earlier and arresting those scum before murdering ten of thousands not only in the usa but in afghanistan and iraq with the revenge attacks by the usa.

[the_UNKNOWN_DEAD]

Q24, on 06 May 2010 - 09:43 PM, said:

...there is no room in these matters for the compassion...

Good, then none shall be given...you're just another "911 dufus" who hasn't a clue...


...I blame the public school system for allowing kids these days to graduate with jello for brains.

[Q24]

olympic1, on 06 May 2010 - 10:02 PM, said:

theres no doubt 4 commercial planes were hijacked and downed, the real question or the more serious question if you like is how much the goverment knew about the terrorist plans prior to 9/11 .the official story satisfies me that different agences identified that these men were dangerous they were tracking there movments.the fbi knew they were having flying lessons etc... but each department failed to communicate with eachother or at best couldnt put 2 and 2 together,being the first attack  using airplanes as weapons of mass destruction i cant really blame the agencies for not figuring it out earlier and arresting those scum before murdering ten of thousands not only in the usa but in afghanistan and iraq with the revenge attacks by the usa.

Yes!  Lots of questions regarding the agencies and intelligence services involved: -

Why did the CIA allow known Al Qaeda affiliates into the United States?
Why were the FBI prevented from investigating bin Laden related cases?
Why did the President not react to an intelligence briefing containing specific warnings?
Why was the huge amount of other foreknowledge and warnings ignored?
What links were maintained between the CIA and bin Laden after the Soviet/Afghan war?
Why was it reported that the CIA met with bin Laden shortly prior to 9/11?
How many CIA agents were operating within Al Qaeda and in what capacity at the time of 9/11?
What are the chances the hijackers randomly chose to live with an FBI informant?
What are the chances the hijackers would live right outside the gates of the NSA?
Why have the FBI stated they have no evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11?
Why did the FBI Director state there is no legal proof as to the identities of the hijackers?
Why were the attacks reported to be funded by Pakistan’s intelligence service?
What was the role of the Israeli intelligence agents arrested at the scene on 9/11?

There’s plenty more.

the_UNKNOWN_DEAD, on 06 May 2010 - 10:30 PM, said:

Good, then none shall be given...you're just another "911 dufus" who hasn't a clue...


...I blame the public school system for allowing kids these days to graduate with jello for brains.

Is that the extent of your argument – that anyone who doesn’t agree entirely with the official story is a “dufus”?  Very Compelling  

So how many barrels of oil do you think you’re worth, UNKOWN_DEAD?

[DevilDogPratt]

Quote

Is that the extent of your argument – that anyone who doesn’t agree entirely with the official story is a “dufus”?  Very Compelling  

thats funny, because you dont seem too willing to accept other people's point of view either, yet you make fun of him. why dont you stop getting brainwashed by all these truther losers and look at the facts. they are all layed out infront of you, just open your eyes and look at them

Edited by DevilDogPratt, 07 May 2010 - 02:08 AM.

[Obviousman]

the_UNKNOWN_DEAD, on 06 May 2010 - 10:30 PM, said:

Good, then none shall be given...you're just another "911 dufus" who hasn't a clue...


...I blame the public school system for allowing kids these days to graduate with jello for brains.

But you see they can question...

The questions may be baseless, far fetched or even idiotic.. but they question.

It is such a pity they never listen to the answers (unless the answer seems to give them the result they want).