Bush's warning system
_____________________________________________________________________________
If Bush's warning system were so damned good, it would have functioned before 9/11.
But what reason would a traitor have to forewarn his country ?
Remember that the German-American NeoCons wanted another Pearl Harbor as the
springboard for their plan of world domination.
_____________________________________________________________________________
.
|
|
| User: "Chain Smoker" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush's warning system |
04 Jan 2004 05:12:09 PM |
|
|
<grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk> wrote in message
news:7j6hvvs5gk06kv509roen31tersqa1b6kj@4ax.com...
Bush's warning system
____________________________________________________________________________
_
If Bush's warning system were so damned good, it would have functioned
before 9/11.
But what reason would a traitor have to forewarn his country ?
The system did not exist then. It was created in the aftermath of 9/11.
Revisionism is alive and well on the left I see.
Remember that the German-American NeoCons wanted another Pearl Harbor as
the
springboard for their plan of world domination.
German-American huh? What difference does their race make? You a racist,
grub, like most of your fellows on the left? Is it why your party also
advocates international law that would threaten the existence of Israel and
possibly destroy the Jews therein?
By the way, NeoCons were not in charge during Pearl Harbor, if such a thing
existed at all. It was socialist FDR that held the reins in the USA on that
date. More revisionism and just plain old opinion formed in the absence of
fact on your part. Go back to school and get an education before you try to
give us one.
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.558 / Virus Database: 350 - Release Date: 1/3/2004
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Anonymous" |
|
| Title: Re: Bush's warning system - Look At This |
04 Jan 2004 05:48:36 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Bush's warning system
_____________________________________________________________________________
If Bush's warning system were so damned good, it would have functioned before 9/11.
But what reason would a traitor have to forewarn his country ?
Remember that the German-American NeoCons wanted another Pearl Harbor as the
springboard for their plan of world domination.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits
by Jim Heikkila Saturday August 17, 2002
Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.
The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight
capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of
fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a
destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.
They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that
pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically
capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control
systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit
controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and
one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking
grandma's neck.
No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.
The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual
physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon
plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.
The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.
There is only one way this can happen.
As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the
ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE
CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and
767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the
pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only
in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and
perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency
situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.
Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and
completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a
manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and
their software knows it.
Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.
The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged
inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a
757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the
microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the
people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what
happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due
to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when
the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice
recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically
re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour,
so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the
tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof
that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.
Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining
that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign
minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the
accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic
knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of
the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.
Our information IS controlled
The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a
National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am
qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare
Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a
highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many
communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am
officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone
calls were ever made from the aircraft.
It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area
for a number of reasons.
When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that
your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a
max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If
an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will
not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and
who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to
communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before
it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic
handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete
upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone
or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when
it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three
times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this
handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during
takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were
impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts.
I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible.
If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the
boeing site, search the DARPA site, search were you have not searched
before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals,
and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original
documents on my computer to safeguard against this.
Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for
those aircraft, we did 911 ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have
911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside
its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access
to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that
material is used."
===========================================================
I had nothing to do with the above article, --however, will it be
verified or discredited by reliable independent sources.
Is the above article factually correct concerning software control and
the black boxes? The cell phone issue is rather immaterial because the
hijacker's could have wanted to take over the airliners so they could
hold the passengers hostage to trade for prisoners they wanted released.
However, Boeing 757 and 767 fully autonomous flight capability took
over they would end up precisely where they did while serving the
objectives of the controllers.
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essayaninterestingday.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
