Bin Laden Dead Truthers Mourn

beachnut said:
Study NORAD. Our Sky's are for commercial traffic, not combat air patrols. NORAD was intercepting aircraft coming from overseas, and they did it is airspace designed for them to be clear of traffic.

Please show us were there were rules to shoot down hijacked aircraft before 911, or tactics, or procedures.

The best you will find, the USAF would be called up to follow jets that were not responding, after an hour or two, and maybe shoot down derelict objects which endangered people or property.

The military is for war, not peace time domestic problems; the military is restricted from doing domestic police work, it is due to our heritage about not wanting troops in the street. Military for war, not domestic junk.

You are in the wrong thread... There is a lot of information on NORAD and 911 truth delusions. http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=104587 Search Google for norad etc, site:randi.org, if you can't use the search function here at JREF
Click to expand...

I have studied NORAD a lot more than most. You are not entirely correct in your description. There is a very defined engagement procedure that is initiated by the FAA which engages NORAD immediately. You are being disingenuous if you fail to mention the elements involved with straying from the flight plan, altitude and other sundry compliances within lane assignments for commercial aircraft.

Not sure what you mean by "domestic police work" but NORAD is bound by charter within the rules of engagement to intercept aircraft after notification from the FAA... plain and simple.

Who said shoot down the aircraft? Do not create a false choice... I never said shoot down, if I said that... point it out to me and I will admit that the statement would be incorrect. If you are not familiar with interception (which I know that you know like the back of your hand) then look it up. I am quite familiar with CJCSI 3610.01A as I assume you are too... refer to 4. Policy section "a" it details the chain of enforcement and procedures... it was on page 1 in my copy.

Derelict objects normally refer to unmanned or ROV aircraft is that what you mean?
 
Be civil and ensure that you address the argument rather than attacking the arguer.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LashL
 
Last edited by a moderator:
JihadJane said:
You say it's not objective. Has it, in your opinion, missed out some important events or news items that you think it should have included?
Click to expand...

Nope, but the spin it puts on it, certainly makes it so it is no longer "objective".

Take a look at the part labeled "The neocon plan for China."

"A group of Neocons formed the PNAC"

If that is not spin and the opposite of being objective, then I don't know what is.

Here's another.

"While China and Pakistan bolster their ties, the United States and Pakistan foundation continues to crumble. The United States has been launching predator drone strikes inside Pakistan, slaughtering an unknown number of civilians, blowing up houses, knocking legs off, and causing an all-time-high surge of American resentment. Most of these attacks have occurred inside an area known as "North Waziristan", targeting alleged Taliban "tribal militants". "

Do you see the spin?


"With Osama Bin Laden out of the way, the United States can now move on and create new enemies in oil-rich lands, such as Anwar Al-Awlaki, a US citizen currently living in Yemen who has been called the "Bin Laden of the Internet". "

Al Awlaki is not a new enemy of the US. He's been that way for quite some time.

" Al-Awlaki was designated by the United States as a “Specially Designated Global Terrorist” on July 12, 2010."

Source
http://www.fbi.gov/washingtondc/press-releases/2011/wfo022411a.htm

Man, that site is spinning faster than a top.

Do you see the non "objective" part now? I mean, if you can't, then I guess it's because you're spinning the same direction.
 
Jihad seems to be absent from this thread since my last post......Wonder why that is???

Just kidding, I know why that is.
 
triforcharity said:
If the USN SEALs were told to not bring him back alive, oh well. No sweat of my back. But, I highly doubt that, given the rules of war under the Geneva Convention.
Click to expand...
But the War on Terror is not a "war" of the sort the Geneva Convention would apply to. ObL did not serve any nation. He was just a murderous civilian.
 
TruthersLie said:
Political bias... do "they hate us for our freedoms?" Kinda. They don't understand our freedoms. I just had a very heated discussion with my students about the stupid pastor in Florida who burned the Qu'ran. According to my students if you burn ONE you have pissed on ALL of Islam.
Maybe you don't understand that, but let me put it in a very simple terms. They don't UNDERSTAND our freedoms. And they DISLIKE how many of those freedoms are being used. They take OFFENSE to how those freedoms are expressed.

When asked about the political cartoon in which someone drew a picture of the prophet... they stated it was RIGHT and GOOD that the danish newspaper was attacked.

A friend of mine conducted some pretty good research for his Phd (he hasn't finished all of it yet), but his results were presented at last years TESOL Arabia conference. Over 95% of all the students he surveyed WANTED government and religious censorship of what was on TV, Radio and the Internet. Go back and READ that again. Get your mind around the idea.

Do they "hate us for our freedoms?" Not really. Do they think that our freedoms are insulting to Islam? Yes. do they think many of our freedoms are directly attacking Islam? Yes.
Click to expand...

Great post!!! When I was in college, one of my majors was Geography of the Middle East/North Africa. Unfortunately I graduated in '75 which means the Middle East was an entirely different place back then. To see you post about kids discussing the above issues blows my mind. I could understand the content of what you posted if you were referring to 40 years ago but to have this occur today emphasizes Islam's importance to them.
 
ladmo said:
Great post!!! When I was in college, one of my majors was Geography of the Middle East/North Africa. Unfortunately I graduated in '75 which means the Middle East was an entirely different place back then. To see you post about kids discussing the above issues blows my mind. I could understand the content of what you posted if you were referring to 40 years ago but to have this occur today emphasizes Islam's importance to them.
Click to expand...

Actually it kinda sucked that a teacher thinks lack of respect is just TS. We all know where the 'anything goes' trend of thought comes from.
 
MRC_Hans said:
Those were all prior to 11/9 2001. While I don't condemn the action of killing OBL, I feel rather reassured to see that such actions were not SOP till after 911.

Hans
Click to expand...

If they killed him who would have the man blamed everything on?
 
Clayton Moore said:
That's a riot. Your source is no good cause it whatever. If it is a vehicle for free speech, like anything else you read, let the reader beware.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._O'Neill

How about that? I think he was on suicide watch.
Click to expand...

I didn't tell JJ that her source was wrong--I was wondering why she used it, for no other reason than because politically it's diametrically opposed to her. It was just surprising to me. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

I have no opinion on the actual article whatsoever, only to say it is irrelevant to 9/11.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom