INFOWARS.COM

[iplaw]

HEY THE PLAGIARIZER IS BACK

quote:
Here is the procedures as requested by the almighty IPLAW FAA Interception Procedures

These are current policies genius.  What was mentioned by me and PM were FAA regulations PRE 9/11, big difference.

The title page clearly states that these specs were modified as of August 3, 2006.  Either you don't read well or you are passing misinformation, I'm guessing the latter.

quote:
The military sent fighter jets to chase suspicious aircraft 462 times between Sept. 11 and June, nearly seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from the same period a year earlier.

That is 67 times in less then one year! Not 1 time since 1999... Get your facts straight man.

Nowhere in that story does it say that those intercepts were from DOMESTIC AIR TRAFFIC.  All scrambles of military aircraft pre 9/11 came from International ADIZ when aircraft enter our airspace from outside the contiguous 48 states as there were NO DOMESTIC ADIZs pre 9/11.

Nice try with the spin there though plagiarizer.

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

HEY THE PLAGIARIZER IS BACK

quote:
Here is the procedures as requested by the almighty IPLAW FAA Interception Procedures

These are current policies genius.  What was mentioned by me and PM were FAA regulations PRE 9/11, big difference.

The title page clearly states that these specs were modified as of August 3, 2006.  Either you don't read well or you are passing misinformation, I'm guessing the latter.

quote:
The military sent fighter jets to chase suspicious aircraft 462 times between Sept. 11 and June, nearly seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from the same period a year earlier.

That is 67 times in less then one year! Not 1 time since 1999... Get your facts straight man.

Nowhere in that story does it say that those intercepts were from DOMESTIC AIR TRAFFIC.  All scrambles of military aircraft pre 9/11 came from International ADIZ when aircraft enter our airspace from outside the contiguous 48 states as there were NO DOMESTIC ADIZs pre 9/11.

Nice try with the spin there though plagiarizer.

IPLAW ALmighty has spoken, and so it is truth.  You discredit my story because it does not specifically say domestic flights but you expect us to believe what you pull out of your a$$ without any documentation?  Come on man you have to do better then that.  Prove to me that only one plane has been intercepted since '99.  Prove to me that SOP was not violated on 9/11.... YOU CAN'T!

According to the FAA, the military scrambled fighters at its request 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001 (FAA News Release, August 9, 2002). According to the Calgary Herald (Oct. 13, 2001), NORAD scrambled fighters 129 times in 2000. According to a report by the US General Accounting Office in 1994, moreover, NORAD scrambled fighters 1518 times during the previous four years, which would have been an average of 379 times per year (http://www.fas.org/man/gao/gao9476.htm).

[iplaw]

quote:
IPLAW ALmighty has spoken, and so it is truth. You discredit my story because it does not specifically say domestic flights but you expect us to believe what you pull out of your a$$ without any documentation? Come on man you have to do better then that. Prove to me that only one plane has been intercepted since '99. Prove to me that SOP was not violated on 9/11.... YOU CAN'T!

Extremely weak position there plagiarizer.  You are making the accusations of fault and failure, not me.  To make those accusations you have to PROVE the abberation which you can't do.  The burden of proof is on the accuser and until you present valid evidence you have no right to make the accusation.

You can't accuse anyone of violating a policy when:

1.  You have never provided pre 9/11 directives that show how threats were dealt with.  You only gave CURRENT directives.

2.  You have never provided any FACTUAL proof that anyone in the armed services ever intercepted a COMMERCIAL AIRLINER pre 9/11, because those records DON'T EXIST.  So it's pure speculation for anyone to assume.

WHAT WE DO KNOW:

Domestic ADIZ zones were non existent until post 9/11 according to Bill Schumann of the FAA.  So until you can show us definitive proof that any of these intercepts pre 9/11 were DOMESTIC you have no leg to stand on other than your typical arguments full of half truths and misrepresentations.  Please show us any documentation affirming your contention that PRE 9/11 there were domestic ADIZs.

quote:
According to the FAA, the military scrambled fighters at its request 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001 (FAA News Release, August 9, 2002). According to the Calgary Herald (Oct. 13, 2001), NORAD scrambled fighters 129 times in 2000. According to a report by the US General Accounting Office in 1994, moreover, NORAD scrambled fighters 1518 times during the previous four years, which would have been an average of 379 times per year (http://www.fas.org/man/gao/gao9476.htm).

Your story you linked to bolsters my argument.  It states that these were COLD WAR policies.  So you think we were patroling DOMESTIC AIR TRAFFIC looking for COLD WAR threats?  Not likely.  Your reading comprehension and cognitive skills never fail to amuse.

Try again plaigiarizer.

[Conan71]

So Alt, how WAS NYC?  How'd the big interviews with Fox and CNN go?  How many people did you convert to your claptrap?

[altruismsuffers]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

So Alt, how WAS NYC?  How'd the big interviews with Fox and CNN go?  How many people did you convert to your claptrap?

FOX interview went well, I have not seen it yet but I have it recorded.  CNN stayed as far away as possible.  I did have an interview with Univision and NYC1.  We had around 2,000 people with black "Investigate 911" shirts.  The policemen were very kind and helpful.  We handed out around 10,000 copies of Loose Change.  People were interested in our message and there were no incidents.  All in all besides the media blackout it was a great day.

[altruismsuffers]

IPLAW you may be right about the past flights not being domestic.  It does not matter.  The reason that no planes were scrambled for domestic passenger flights in the past would be because domestic passenger flights stay squaking and stay on path.  This would give no reason to scramble.  Then on 9/11 they have 4 domestic flights loose contact, loose transponders, and go off course, and they don't scramble even after a plane has hit the building!?  This does not make a lick of sense ESPECIALLY since the war games they were practicing spefically involved these incidents.  

Personal attack removed.  If you persist in adding personal insults in your posts, the entire post can be wiped out.

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

HEY THE PLAGIARIZER IS BACK

quote:
Here is the procedures as requested by the almighty IPLAW FAA Interception Procedures

These are current policies genius.  What was mentioned by me and PM were FAA regulations PRE 9/11, big difference.

The title page clearly states that these specs were modified as of August 3, 2006.  Either you don't read well or you are passing misinformation, I'm guessing the latter.

quote:
The military sent fighter jets to chase suspicious aircraft 462 times between Sept. 11 and June, nearly seven times as often as the 67 scrambles from the same period a year earlier.

That is 67 times in less then one year! Not 1 time since 1999... Get your facts straight man.

Nowhere in that story does it say that those intercepts were from DOMESTIC AIR TRAFFIC.  All scrambles of military aircraft pre 9/11 came from International ADIZ when aircraft enter our airspace from outside the contiguous 48 states as there were NO DOMESTIC ADIZs pre 9/11.

Nice try with the spin there though plagiarizer.

IPLAW ALmighty has spoken, and so it is truth.  You discredit my story because it does not specifically say domestic flights but you expect us to believe what you pull out of your a$$ without any documentation?  Come on man you have to do better then that.  Prove to me that only one plane has been intercepted since '99.  Prove to me that SOP was not violated on 9/11.... YOU CAN'T!

According to the FAA, the military scrambled fighters at its request 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001 (FAA News Release, August 9, 2002). According to the Calgary Herald (Oct. 13, 2001), NORAD scrambled fighters 129 times in 2000. According to a report by the US General Accounting Office in 1994, moreover, NORAD scrambled fighters 1518 times during the previous four years, which would have been an average of 379 times per year (http://www.fas.org/man/gao/gao9476.htm).

Melt-Down in progress....

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

IPLAW you may be right about the past flights not being domestic.  It does not matter.  The reason that no planes were scrambled for domestic passenger flights in the past would be because domestic passenger flights stay squaking and stay on path.  This would give no reason to scramble.  Then on 9/11 they have 4 domestic flights loose contact, loose transponders, and go off course, and they don't scramble even after a plane has hit the building!?  

Personal attack removed.  If you persist in adding personal insults in your posts, the entire post can be wiped out.

That's pure speculation on your part.  You have no information to back up that assertion and are ASSUMING what protocol was.  There was no uniform method for dealing with what happen on 9/11 until AFTER the events transpired and POST 9/11 protocols were established.

They had no idea how many hijacked planes were in the air and out of the THOUSANDS of flights taking off and landing at that time of the day the confusion was immeasurable.  So to say that ATC knew exactly how many planes were a threat that needed intervention is impermissible hindsight on your part by assuming that in UNFORSEEN crisis situations people behave like robots and make flawless decisions as they follow NONEXISTENT PROTOCOLS.  Remember also that there were ONLY 14 jets patroling ADIZs that day FOR THE ENTIRE US MAINLAND.

Can you imagine the outcry from the masses had we shot down aircraft without sufficient cause?  Look at the Payne Stewart FAA report and see how long it took them to actually VERIFY that something was indeed wrong.  Three separate flybys were done before a definitive answer was given.  

Once the gravity of the situation was understood jets were appropriately patroling confined ADIZs over NYC and DC.

Even if they had scrambled planes to intercept after the first plane hit there were STANDING POLICIES that kept jets from going supersonic.  So to say that they could have reached the second plane in time is SPECULATION.

quote:
This does not make a lick of sense ESPECIALLY since the war games they were practicing spefically involved these incidents.  

Again a half truth.  These response drills were meant to deal with proper and measured responses to ACCIDENTAL impacts with buildings not MULTIPLE INTENTIONAL ACTS OF TERRORISM.  A Pentagon spokesperson was even quoted as saying that drills were not even performed using the Pentagon as a target because such an attack was too far fetched.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by altruismsuffers

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

So Alt, how WAS NYC?  How'd the big interviews with Fox and CNN go?  How many people did you convert to your claptrap?

FOX interview went well, I have not seen it yet but I have it recorded.  CNN stayed as far away as possible.  I did have an interview with Univision and NYC1.  We had around 2,000 people with black "Investigate 911" shirts.  The policemen were very kind and helpful.  We handed out around 10,000 copies of Loose Change.  People were interested in our message and there were no incidents.  All in all besides the media blackout it was a great day.

Ahhh yes, the Loose Stool web site, that was the name of the web site for the two idiot 23 year olds I heard on the radio a couple of weeks ago.  Sounded just like Beavis and Butthead.  

"Uh, huh, huh, huh hey Beavis the government blew up the twin towers, then pulled tower 7, I said 'pulled' uh, huh, huh, huh."

They were, uh, 18 when the disaster happened, that makes them very, very credible versus degreed experts with college degree thingies who are actually trained to analyze a catastrophe like this.

They need to put down the bong and get with reality.[)]

[iplaw]

Here they are on the DC leg of the Loose "___" Insert Funny Name Tour

[Conan71]

Ahh yes, there are also wonderful dating sites like these that are linked to by loose stool.com:

http://sedoparking.com/parking.php4?task=search&domain=loosechange.com&s=96a7dbd214550715885e&language=en&pxy_t=0&add_c=b2818b349f2d2a39aff1104b9cd35822&keyword=Adult+dating

These practices will result in the deletion of messages or the banning of the user:

* Vulgarity: posts containing or linking to obscene or explicit references
* Spamming: posting or e-mailing off-topic or unrelated commercial content
* Off Topic: replies that are off-topic will be deleted