OK the 'threat in DC today was acted on. WTF happened 9/11?

How did a commercial plane beat the pentagon's missile defense and hit the Pentagon?

We all do. It starts with "L" or "M" and ends in "IHOP".

By the way, there is a forum for this elsewhere on DU if it is not rhetorical. It has this question asked frequently and answered in depth.

the Pentagon's lack of response to the Airliner attack, since the Pentagon is ringed with anti-aircraft batteries. Michael Ruppert's book Crossing the Rubicon also shows us the wargames that were going on on 9-11-01 which would provide 'cover' for any concerted attack, since the wargames were mimicking hijacking. No mention of the Ptech (Saudi software company with access to FAA and intel computers) that day...

Very interesting. The 9-11 Commission Report is the modern Warren Commission Report. Things never change, do they ?

and she suggessted maybe now days they're more cautious and have better security. :shrug: That could be argued but I don't think so. I think this whole thing was a setup. Call me paranoid but just too many hole's and knowing this administration.

in a constant state of fear and paranoia over the last 3.5 years, so it's understandable why they would take this minor incident as a major threat.

alerts and incidents. Remember the 'trifecta joke', * says "Lucky me, I hit the trifecta".

come on... where have you been? We live in a different world... A Brave... New... World
:puke:

cause this place really has changed since 2001. you can lie in a park and see no planes flying over head, even at 30,000 feet. it really is a different world.

and it was no one in particular's fault that interceptors weren't ready in 2001, we don't actually have planes standing on alert 24 hours a day to guard against the Canadian Air Force, you know, there wasn't a serious and reputable threat to any particular target that would have justified the keeping of military jets on ready alert.

I know, I know, the Administration somehow knew it was coming. But even the warnings that they should have reacted to wouldn't have been enough to have raedy-alert planes next to every city in the country. First off, we don't have enough planes or pilots to do that. And the best security for an airliner is on the ground before the plane takes off. Can you really imagine a US fighter shooting down a United Jet based on a theory that it was going to hit something? Remember, no one had ever used planes a missiles like this before, it was a paradigm shift, and even if the administration thought they knew what was going to happen, the best defense is to prevent the hijacking in the first place. which they did not do.

We were not at war on the morning of September 11, 2001, as you no doubt recall. The idiots running the show were woefully unprepared for reality, and neglected their responsibility to protect the country, but I cannot blame them for not having planes on ready alert.

a Cessna is a little easier than jet-liner that were not identified as hijacked until the last moment when you had not expected that..when your model for hijacked planes would be that they would head outside the USA and to Cuba.. that has changed.

Good on them for this. It will help people feel a little safer. Make people feel like they are encased in a bubble of sorts.. the opposite of 9/11 when the bubble of safety burst.

I hope this helps. Specially the kids.

You might think the government's guard would have been up. If four jetliners went off route simultaneously, someone might have gotten a clue. But who could have imagined an attack from the air?

Gosh, think about the kiddies. How warm & cozy....

of it back today. You cannot just dance the opposite of Cheney * co and deny every single good thing that happens. Freaks like them will dance you outside of your own dam self if you let that happen. They would then control you.

So they didn't prioritize bin-Laden. Anyone who had known would have stopped those monsters on 9/11. But they didn't prioritize. And now they all do on terror alerts. It will never happen again in the same way. And chances are it will not happen again in ways that have not been invented yet. Cause that was the problem on 9/11.

Nice for me to know the jets are at the ready and nearby.

In short, a Cessna 152 is not a threat. And it's not fast.

It flies at best about 100mph. It weighs, max, about 1700lbs.

For comparison, that's about 25mph slower and 500lbs lighter than a Mazda Miata.

The capital of the most powerful nation on earth was evacuated by a "threat" less than that posed by one of the smallest and lightest cars being manufactured today.

:eyes:

Sure, the plane itself wouldn't be that dangerous, but a small airplane or a Miata loaded with explosives could be a serious threat. One need only look at the devastation car bombs have been causing in Iraq recently to see how dangerous they can be. :(

Here's a pic of a Cessna 172 that was flown into the 40th floor of a skyscraper a while back.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/01/05/tampa.crash/

The 172 weighs about 500lbs more, flies 10-20mph faster, and carries about 10 more gallons of gas.

This plane hit a WINDOW, and was stopped halfway in. Stopped by a big WINDOW.

A 152 could threaten at most 4-5 people with desks near a window. That's all.

In FACT, those people were put at GREATER risk by being evacuated. They were safer inside the building.

And if the guy flying this plane was intending to do what others have done, namely, to land near the White House or Capital Mall, he would have been landing on the heads of all those people supposedly saved by the brainiacs in control of this mess.

I'm not sure why you're trying to show that a small plane won't cause that much damage to a building...that's what I agreed with. It would not be inconceivable for someone to put a bomb on a plane and have it blow when the plane crashed.

That's the real question here. Simply, a 152 with 2 people that's flown down from PA can carry MAYBE 50lbs more. That's not much of a bomb.

I admit I wouldn't want to be in the blast range of 50lbs of explosive, but on a national security scale, that's nothing.

And don't get started with "suitcase nukes supposedly only weigh about 50lbs." 1st, that's not a fact. 2nd, a regular car would be a much more effective delivery method, as it wouldn't garner the attention a small plane would get. A car could just drive down to the DC mall and boom. Current security measures won't do squat against that.

In short, a 152 isn't much of a danger. And anything it IS capable of doing, a ground vehicle could do better.

The worst danger in this situation was our own reactions to it.

hit the pentagon, it flew within miles of the whitehouse as well.

How did the Japanese beat Pearl Harbor's combat air patrols and anti-air cannons and defeat the American navy?

Well gee....could there be a difference between 1941 and 2001? ::blink:: Maybe the whole security thingy needed revamping after 60 fucking years ya think? Wonder how the US was even considered a SUPER POWER For all those years before 9/11....

If I were to walk up to you on the street and attempt to sucker-punch you, you'd most likely be knocked down.

If I, the next day, were to walk up to you and try to punch you in the exact same manner, and you were to block it, I wouldn't expect bystanders to say, "WTF? It was blocked! How come it wasn't blocked YESTERDAY?!"

plan to get the US into WWII. FDR and US intell knew the Dec 7th attack was coming and let it happen. But Adm. Kimmell and Gen Short did have some notice and no torpedo nets in on Battleship Row nor the radarmen, who also saw the planes coming were given a priority. BTW, Stinnett's book shows that Kimmell was told that war was coming in July 1940, not like he didn't have a clue.

Bush & company thru PNAC chose to ignore GHWBs and Scowcroft's warnings about a war and occupation. But pretext is needed. The sad thing in all of this is that Bush may try to excuse his 'day of deceit' by pointing the finger back at FDR.

Pathetic. "New Pearl Harbor" ?

Recently released docs show that we cracked Japanese encryption months before the attack. The History Channel has done a show on this recently. Infowars.com has extensive documentation to support this.

Pearl Harbor was used as a pretext to get into a unpopular war.

Anything sounding familiar here?

so it wasn't necessary to stop it.

Of course, your question will be answered by right wingers as follows:

"Bush stepped up security after 9/11. Before 9/11 Clinton left us open to attack. But after 9/11, Bush got things done and now we are safe."

Of course, they leave out any mention of Bush's refusal to do anything for the full 8 months he was in office pre-9/11...

So you are saying the defense systems work only when the shrub is in DC right? Wouldn't all the Dc residents feel better if he did not spend so much time playing farmer on the Pig Ranch in Crawford?

I thought he was in Maryland biking?

I remember reading that they changed the protocols for scrambling fighters in response to an errant civilian plane just a few months prior to 9/11 such that NORAD could not act without direct authorization from the Secretary of Defense.

Someone give me a link, I know I'm not imagining this.

I looked through my 9/11 bookmarks and could not find a link, but you are not imagining it.

I don't have time to further search, but Google is your friend :)