English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And doesn't this in fact proove 9/11 was an inside job?

2006-10-13 14:56:13 · 24 answers · asked by inquiringmind 3 in Politics & Government Politics

24 answers

Just as on 9/11. NORAD was scrambled AFTER the fact. Not necessarily that 9/11 was an inside job. Which it could very well have been, and I do lean towards this idea. It's just proof that the USA is really not much safer than it was pre-9/11, despite what the leader wishes us to believe.

2006-10-13 19:43:06 · answer #1 · answered by Schona 6 · 1 0

During the cold war the US use to keep planes Running on the tar mat all the time just so the pilots could jump in and go. After the cold war they stopped this practice. After 911 the US set up I believe it's seven strategic Air commands across the US. After that small plane hit the tower fighters were scrambled across America over an Unknown number of US cities. The Fact is it would be Nearly Impossible to get fighters to NYC in time to Stop an attack on a building. That plane was only off course a very few moments before Impact. Unless you want 24/7 round the clock Air cover for ALL major US cities It's very unlikely that the Air Force can stop another 911. And think about this a 747 coming into NYC that has been Hijacked and presumed to be heading towards a Building. Let's assume the Air Force has fighters right there. What do you think might happen if the US Air Force was to shoot down a Commercial airliners right over NYC. Think there might just be some casualities on the ground?

2006-10-13 15:18:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No, it really only proves that NORAD had never planned for an event even remotely similar to what went down on 9/11. Fact is, nobody did.

The government has thousands of people, both military and civilian, whose jobs are to dream up possible disaster scenarios and then plan how to deal with them. Everything from terror attacks, natural disasters, nuclear reactor accidents, riots and civil unrest, hostage situations, hijackings -- you name it.

I worked on some of those teams when I was in the AF. Some of the scenarios were pretty wild. But what went down on 9/11 was simply beyond the wildest imagination of any of the planners. Had the planes come from international airspace and not been on flight plans -- UBL probably considered buying a few old airliners for that purpose; he could afford it -- things might have been different.

The problem with the way that the hijackings panned out is that nothing like that had EVER occured before. In virtually every hijacking case previously -- even the ones where there were fatalities or the aircraft was destroyed -- they landed safely first while negotiations were carried out. The use of civilian airliners as missiles simply was never imagined.

You may rest assured that something like THAT will never happen again. And you may also rest assured that the planners have kicked the guessing game up into high gear in an effort to stay one step of the terrorists.

2006-10-13 15:11:40 · answer #3 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 1 0

How silly an inside job. President Bush was reading my pet goat do you really think they are that organized. Loose the paranoia.
They scrambled because after 911 they set that protocol in place. Now if that happens anywhere in the US NORAD sends fighter planes into action. This was not the case pre 911. No fighter plane would shoot down an airline. It was unthinkable. heck no movie even thought this could happen.
Planes were dispatched but it happened to quickly for them to do anything. They couldn't shoot an airliner down back then and it would have been useless over Manhattan. It may have killed even more people.

2006-10-13 15:02:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

There was an awesome article a month or so ago about the scramblers on 9/11 in the magazine "Vanity Fair". If I remember correctly I think it said that at that time, scrambler planes were not posted near by because of cut backs and even though they were out, they were also hunting for a "phantom plane". Another reason given was even though they were trying to scramble, it wasn't clear to them wether it was a live run or a drill. Heck I don't know what really happen and I will never pretend that I do. (**deleted last sentence because it didn't make sense even to myself....just having one of those nights)

2006-10-13 15:00:20 · answer #5 · answered by ♪♫♪justpassingby♪♫♪ 5 · 2 0

Before 9/11, nobody ever crashed an airplane into a building in NYC. I don't see the connection to an inside job, but keep looking for it. You may one day find out that Al Gore planned the whole thing to get back at Bush for losing the election.

2006-10-13 15:08:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Before 9/11 NORAD only tracked military threats like military planes/jets or missiles NOT commercial airlines or single engine civilian prop planes (like the one that the baseball player was flying) which pre-9/11 were never considered threats.

2006-10-13 15:03:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

NORAD was scrambled on 9/11 but there was mis-communication between the departments.

2006-10-13 14:59:48 · answer #8 · answered by Carlos D 4 · 2 0

No it does not. What is proved is how gullible people are. NORAD is supposed to protect you. What a gullible bunch you yanks are. If a plane is traveling at 300kph and is 500mtrs from a tall building how does NORAD help you. Wake up from your government induced stupor and smell the coffee.

2006-10-13 15:04:47 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

You know you really need to grow up and learn a thing or two.. you are disrespecting all those people that lost their life that day. 9-11 was not an inside job and to say such nonsense disrespects all the family of the loved one's that perished...... I hope you learn something in school because if you are an American I would hate to think that one day you are going to run my country.

2006-10-13 15:10:37 · answer #10 · answered by katjha2005 5 · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers