.
Is refuted by:
.
.
Seems like this person was very clear on the difference between real and exercise, which is why he knew that a lot of "real" was happening during an exercise.
I mean, otherwise, he'd've said, "I've never seen so much real world happen during real world stuff" or "I've never seen so much exercise happen during an exercise."
Or perhaps, "Gee, it's so confusing -- was that real world or was that exercise?"
.
Your speculation is as good as any, of course. And, you can believe whatever you want to believe, again, of course.
However, the way forward here is to assess the actual NORAD/NEADS tapes and see if they shed any light on the matter, thus eliminating the need, let alone the propriety, of engaging in speculation.
There the issue is put to rest. The fact is, the controllers DID NOT know the difference between real or simulated inputs.
For instance, we all know that Air traffic controller Pete Zalewski was the one who thought he recognized a foreign, Middle Eastern-sounding voice, but does not make out the specific words that are attributed to the conversation he overheard, namely, the famous “we have some planes” declaration.
Zalewski did however respond saying: “Who’s trying to call me?” Seconds later, in the next transmission, the transmission includes: “Nobody move. Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you’ll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet,” according to the 9/11 Commission and mainstream media stallwart MSNBC, 9/9/2006.
But Bill Peacock, the FAA director of air traffic services, (confirmed by the FAA transcript) later says:
“We didn’t know where the transmission came from, what was said and who said it.”
And, David Canoles, the FAA’s manager of air traffic evaluations and investigations, adds:
“The broadcast wasn’t attributed to a flight. Nobody gave a flight number.”
The FAA report that is the source of the OP simply says with respect to these claimed transmissions that they came from:
“an unknown origin.”
See:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa7.pdf
pg. 4/59
So, there you have it. The voice transmissions were of
unknown origin, meaning they could not be distinguished as being either real or exercise.
That is the point, posters and lurkers. Radio transmissions that are unidentified, blips on a radar screen that are electronic and therefore subject to simulation, are inherently indistinguishable by the people sitting in front of monitors and/or listening to something coming into there ears via headsets, speakers, phones or similar devices.
Come on posters and lurkers, put on your objective thinking caps.
Once again, I am not questioning, let alone challenging, what people believe.
If you believe jetliners were hijacked on 9/11; fine. Believe as you will for as long as you can and as ardently as is necessary.
The point here is only and solely that the data here under consideration cannot be determined to be either real or exercise.
So, in conclusion, your post refutes nothing and this post confirms that your claim of refutation is not viable on the basis of the available data that is provided here and sourced.
Thanks for your post.
