WAAS system

[k-robjoe]

I don´t have the time to have a cløser look at this now, so I´ll just post it here, and have a look tomorrow, for comments :

"A feature utilized by RNP approach procedures and utilizing the WAAS signal activated one year before September 11, 2001, is the use of descending constant radius turns, known as Radius-to-Fix (RF) turns.<17> Such turns are similar to the 330 degree descending right turn performed by American Airlines flight 77 (AA 77) upon its final approach-to-impact with the Pentagon building on September 11, 2001.<18> The point at which AA 77's 330 degree descending right turn terminated would be comparable to a Final Approach Fix (FAF), from where a straight final runway approach segment would commence."



The president of the "Naverus" company that now designs the RNP procedures that utilize technology available prior to September 11, 2001, described a complex RNP test flight performed by a Boeing 757 auto-pilot system, utilizing waypoint coordinate information contained within the aircraft's Flight Management Computer (FMC), that included a descent from a 38,000 foot altitude.<11>

"You're watching the whole thing unfold. The airplane is turning, going where it's supposed to go. ... it's all automatic."

"Watching the autopilot and flight controls work this airplane in these complex maneuvers was just fantastic. There was nobody in that airplane who wasn't visibly impressed."

By 1999, Boeing 757 and 767 aircraft like those involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, contained digital flight control systems that can "automatically fly the airplanes on pre-selected routes, headings, speed or altitude maneuvers."<12>

http://www.911blogger.com/node/19305

[greyl]

1. "I don´t have the time to have a cløser look at this now, so I´ll just post it here, ..."?

In other words, you may have posted total bullshit - you have no clue.
Thanks for raising the journalistic bar, k-robjoe.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[greyl]

61. Oh, brother. The cool people don't buy your bullshit, HR. nt

[HamdenRice]

62. The "cool kids"?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You mean the ones in the majik spoon benders tree house club no gurls aloud?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

You've gone off the deep end, little friend, to the place of :silly: :crazy: :silly:

[greyl]

63. Not one to quote for accuracy, eh? It's "cool people".

They know who they are.
You don't.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Realityhack]

3. I think your title may be off.

WAAS is just the GPS correction signal that increases accuracy. I think you are talking about what is done with that (or other) information later.

I also don't see the relevance. Could you explain WTF this has to do with 9-11?

[jakeXT]

4. It's from a 911 related site, if you follow the link

During numerous FAA, U.S. Air Force and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) sponsored runway approach and touchdown test flights between 1994 and 2002, involving augmented GPS positional signals and the auto-land systems of Boeing 757, 767 and other Boeing 700 series aircraft, horizontal and vertical positional accuracies of just several meters or less were routinely achieved. The four aircraft used to carry out the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were also Boeing 757-200 and 767-200 model aircraft. Runways of major U.S. airports like JFK International, Chicago-O'Hare International and Los Angeles International are between 150 and 200 feet wide.<24><25><26> The WTC towers were each 208 feet wide.<27>
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/AutopilotSystemsMonaghan.pdf

[Realityhack]

5. Yes I get that...

and you didn't address my statement about WAAS...

To try to better phrase my question... what significance do you think this information has? Are you proposing they used auto pilot to make the approach turns? Are you arguing terrorists or government conspiracy?

A runway being the width of the twin towers is hardly relevance. Can you describe specifically how *you* think this is relevant to the events of 9-11?

[jakeXT]

6. If GPS was used to hit the targets you need accuracy

The south tower impact for example was not that perfect as the north tower impact.

http://911review.com/attack/wtc/impacts.html


You can read the article if you are interested.

[Realityhack]

7. You dodged my questions. n/t

[jakeXT]

8. All of them?

[Realityhack]

All of the ones in the post you responded to.

Assuming I didn't miss something in your post (which I admit is possible) or tally is...

"what significance do you think this information has?"
No answer.

"Are you proposing they used auto pilot to make the approach turns?"
No answer.

"Are you arguing terrorists or government conspiracy?"
No answer.

"A runway being the width of the twin towers is hardly relevance. Can you describe specifically how *you* think this is relevant to the events of 9-11?"
No answer.

3 questions (one was a repeat) 0 answers.

[seemslikeadream]

9. Raytheon landed a pilotless 727 6 times in New Mexico in 8/01

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=raytheon&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on

October 2, 2001: Remote Controlled Passenger Airplane Flew Before 9/11, Despite Claims to the Contrary It is reported that the US company Raytheon landed a 727 six times in a military base in New Mexico without any pilots on board. This was done to test equipment making future hijackings more difficult, by allowing ground control to take over the flying of a hijacked plane. {Associated Press, 10/2/2001; Der Spiegel (Hamburg), 10/28/2001}

Several Raytheon employees with possible ties to this remote control technology program appear to have been on the hijacked 9/11 flights (see September 25, 2001). Earlier in the year, a specially designed Global Hawk plane flew from the US to Australia without pilot or passengers. {Independent Television News, 4/24/2001}

However, most media reports after 9/11 suggest such technology is currently impossible. For instance, the Observer quotes an expert who says that “the technology is pretty much there” but still untried. {Observer, 9/16/2001}

An aviation-security expert at Jane’s Defence Weekly says this type of technology belongs “in the realms of science fiction.” {Financial Times, 9/18/2001; Economist, 9/20/2001} Even President Bush appears to deny the technology currently exists. He gives a speech after 9/11 in which he mentions that the government would give grants to research “new technology, probably far in the future, allowing air traffic controllers to land distressed planes by remote control.” {New York Times, 9/28/2001}

[seemslikeadream]

10. 1984 technology

"Before the final flight on December 1, 1984, more then four years of effort passed trying to set-up final impact conditions considered survivable by the FAA. During those years while 14 flights with crews were flown the following major efforts were underway: NASA Dryden developed the remote piloting techniques necessary for the B-720 to fly as a drone aircraft; General Electric installed and tested four degraders (one on each engine); and the FAA refined AMK (blending, testing, and fueling a full size aircraft). The 14 flights had 9 takeoffs, 13 landings and around 69 approaches, to about 150 feet above the prepared crash site, under remote control. "

http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/CID/Small/index.html

[Realityhack]

11. SLAD.

Do you personally subscribe to the theory that the planes (any of them) were being remote controlled on 9-11?

[seemslikeadream]

12. All I know for sure is that it IS a real possibility

[Realityhack]

13. I think that depends upon what you mean by

"real possibility".
I have no doubt that aircraft could be rigged and flown remotely into the buildings.

But in order for it to be a real possibility (the way I would use that phrase) it would need to fit the other evidence. That I don't see.

As I see it, it is the difference between saying I could have killed OJ's wife (because I posses the physical strength and ability to wield a knife) and saying it is a 'real possibility' given I was on the wrong side of the country at the time etc. etc.

So you think it is likely that planes were *actually* remote controlled on 9-11? Just tying to clarify.

[seemslikeadream]

15. Opinions are like assholes, EVERYONE has one

including me. That's why I like linked facts, you know all those posts I make with links in them?

[Realityhack]

19. No need to be snarky.

There are lots of facts out there. But not all are pertinent. One needs to look at the facts, create a conjecture and then move through fleshing it out and testing the resulting hypothesis.

In other words while you do indeed link to facts (though sometimes they are incorrect) that doesn't mean anything if they are not relevant to some coherent picture of what might have happened.
Sometimes reading your posts I get the feeling that I am in a lecture about new plastic compounds and the presenter suddenly puts up a slide about database structures and sorting algorithms... then wonders why the everyone is confused. Without some link to some idea about what happened a lot of the information you post is, for lack of a better term off topic.

At this point (years after the fact) I don't see a lot of new information coming forward. Sure we see occasional bits but most of this is old stuff. Or it is new but related to discredited theories. At this stage I expect someone to be able to at least articulate the outlines of an idea of what happened and present some semblance of supporting evidence. Heck even if you aren't sure between a few possibilities at least you could trim the completely irrelevant stuff and describe how you think a fact fits into a particular theory.

[seemslikeadream]

21. I find it interesting that people are so impatient

[Realityhack]

25. non sequitur n/t

[seemslikeadream]

16. So you think it is likely that planes were *actually* remote controlled on 9-11?

It is a real possibility because of stated facts

[Realityhack]

17. Thank you.

I appreciate the strait forward answer.

I disagree but that is a different issue.

[seemslikeadream]

14. and this is fact

Dr. Zakheim


Dov S. Zakheim was sworn in as the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense on May 4, 2001. Dr. Zakheim has previously served in a number of key positions in government and private business. Most recently, he was corporate vice president of System Planning Corp., a technology, research and analysis firm based in Arlington, Va. He also served as chief executive officer of SPC International Corp., a subsidiary specializing in political, military and economic consulting. During the 2000 presidential campaign, he served as a senior foreign policy advisor to then-Governor Bush.

From 1985 until March 1987, Dr. Zakheim was Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Planning and Resources in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy). In that capacity, he played an active role in the Department's system acquisition and strategic planning processes. Dr. Zakheim held a variety of other DoD posts from 1981 to 1985. Earlier, he was employed by the National Security and International Affairs Division of the Congressional Budget Office.

Dr. Zakheim has been a participant on a number of government, corporate, non-profit and charitable boards. His government service includes terms on the United States Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad; the Task Force on Defense Reform (1997); the first Board of Visitors of the Department of Defense Overseas Regional Schools (1998); and the Defense Science Board task force on "The Impact of DoD Acquisition Policies on the Health of the Defense Industry" (2000).

A 1970 graduate of Columbia University with a bachelor's in government, Dr. Zakheim also studied at the London School of Economics. He earned his doctorate in economics and politics at St. Antony's College, University of Oxford, where he was graduate fellow in programs of both the National Science Foundation and Columbia College, and then a research fellow. Dr. Zakheim has been an adjunct professor at the National War College, Yeshiva University, Columbia University and Trinity College, Hartford, Conn., where he was presidential scholar.
http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/zakheim_bio.html




The CEO of SPC


Dr. Dov Zakheim has been nominated to serve as Under Secretary of Defense and Comptroller. He is presently the CEO of SPC International, and in the past he has served as Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Planning and Resources as well as in a variety of Defense Department positions under former President Reagan. He was a member of the Task Force on Defense Reform under then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen and in February of 2000 he was appointed to the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Impact of DoD Acquisition Policies on the Health of the Defense Industry. He has received the Department of Defense Distinguished Public Service Medal; the Bronze Palm to the DoD Distinguished Public Service Medal and the CBO Director's Award for Outstanding Service. A New York native, Dr. Zakheim is a graduate of Columbia University and has also studied at the London School of Economics. He received his doctorate degree from St. Anthony's College at Oxford University.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010212-2.html

It was an SPC subsidiary, TRIDATA CORPORATION, that oversaw the investigation after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 1993.



Flight Termination System



System Planning Corporation's is proud to offer the Flight Termination System (FTS), a fully redundant turnkey range safety and test system for remote control and flight termination of airborne test vehicles. The FTS consists of SPC's Command Transmitter System (CTS) and custom control, interface, and monitoring subsystems. The system is fully programmable and is flexible enough to meet the changing and challenging requirements of today's modern test ranges.




http://www.sysplan.com /


Dr. Dov S. Zakheim
CEO, Systems Planning Corporation International

Dov S. Zakheim is Corporate Vice President of System Planning Corporation (SPC), a high technology, research, analysis, and manufacturing firm based in Arlington, Virginia. He is also Chief Executive Officer of SPC International Corporation, a subsidiary of SPC that specializes in political, military and economic consulting, and international sales and analysis. In addition, Dr. Zakheim serves as Consultant to the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. He is an Adjunct Scholar of the Heritage Foundation, and a Senior Associate of the Center for International and Strategic Studies.

From 1985 until March 1987, Dr. Zakheim was Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Planning and Resources. In that capacity, he played an active role in the Department's system acquisition and strategic planning processes. Dr. Zakheim also guided Department of Defense policy in a number of international economic fora including the US-USSR Commercial Commission; the Caribbean Basin Initiative; and the Canadian-US Free Trade Agreement. He also successfully negotiated numerous arms cooperation agreements with various US allies.


A graduate of Columbia University, New York, where he earned his B.A., Surnma Cum Laude, and was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, Dr. Zakheim also studied at the London School of Economics. Dr. Zakheim earned his doctorate in economics and politics at St. Antony's College, University of Oxford, where he was a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellow, a Columbia College Kellett Fellow, and a post-doctoral Research Fellow. He has served as Adjunct Professor at the National War College, Yeshiva University and at Columbia University. He is currently Presidential Scholar and Adjunct Professor at Trinity College, Hartford, CT.

Dr. Zakheim served for two terms as a Presidential appointee to the United States Commission for the Preservation of America's Heritage Abroad. In 1997 he was appointed by Secretary of Defense Cohen to the Task Force on Defense Reform. In May 1999 Secretary Cohen named him to the first Board of Visitors of the Department of Defense Overseas Regional Schools.

Dr. Zakheim writes, lectures, and provides radio and television commentary on national defense and foreign policy issues both domestically and internationally, including appearances on major US network news telecasts, McNeil-Lehrer Newshour, Larry King Live, BBC Arab and World Service. and Israeli, Swedish, and Japanese television. He is an editorial board member of Israel Affairs and of The Round Table (the Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs), and serves on review panels for the Wilson Center for International Scholars, the United States Institute of Peace, and the U.S. Naval Institute. He is the author of Flight of the Lavi: Inside a US.-Israeli Crisis (Brassey's, 1996), Congress and National Security in the Post Cold War Era (The Nixon Center, 1998), and numerous articles and chapters in books. Dr. Zakheim is also a trustee of the Foreign Policy Research Institute; serves on the Board of Directors of Search for Common Ground, and of Friends of the Jewish Chapel of the United States Naval Academy; and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and other professional organizations. Dr. Zakheim is a member of the advisory boards of the Center for Security Policy, the Initiative for Peace and Cooperation in the Middle East, and the American Jewish Committee

more
http://www.ndu.edu/inss/symposia/jointops00/zakheim.html


Pentagon finance manager resigns

Thursday 11 March 2004

Rabbi Dov Zakheim's refused to tell journalists the exact reason for his departure on Wednesday. A former adjunct economics professor at New York's Yeshiva University, Rabbi Zakheim has spent more than 30 years working in various jobs at the Pentagon.

But he has also worked in private industry, specifically as a consultant to McDonnell Douglas and Boeing.


Rabbi Dov Zakheim,
Pentagon comptroller and chief financial officer, a conservative Republican who graduated from Jew's College in London in 1973, Zakheim first joined the Department of Defence in 1981 under former president Ronald Reagan.

He was responsible for such tasks as preparing defence planning guidance for nuclear war.

As Pentagon Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer, Rabbi Zakheim's priority has been financial management.
But that does not include additional spending needed to support US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - a sum expected to range from $30 billion to $50 billion.


A General Accounting Office report found Defence inventory systems so lax that the US army lost track of 56 aeroplanes, 32 tanks and 36 Javelin missile command launch-units.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/635B6007-9DD0-436C-BFF6-E6521520B1C7.htm



Analysis: Defense budget practices probed
Thursday, 02-Oct-2003 10:00AM PDT Story from United Press International
Copyright 2003 by United Press International (via ClariNet)

MIAMI, Oct. 2 (UPI) --

Zakheim said, however, he was limited in his response because of the ongoing audit of the issue, which originally was sparked by a telephone call to the Pentagon's Defense Hotline.


"Our objective will be to review the allegations to the Defense Hotline concerning funds 'parked' at the U.S. Special Operations Command by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller)," said a letter from the inspector general's office to Gen. Charles Holland, who has since retired as Special Operations commander.

Among several documents The St. Petersburg Times obtained during its investigation was e-mail sent by Special Operations Command Comptroller Elaine Kingston to colleagues in February 2002.
She said an unidentified official in the Pentagon comptroller's office had asked her if the command could "park" $40 million of research-and-development money in its proposed budget for the 2003 fiscal year.


The programs where the money was placed included missile warning systems on aircraft, infrared equipment on helicopters and radar system. The amounts ranged from $2 million to $5 million.
Kingston said in the e-mail message she coached her colleagues on how to account for the money and avoid attracting congressional attention to it.

"We are doing a favor for the OSD (Office of the Secretary of Defense) which we hope will benefit the command if we should need additional (research and development funds)," the message said.
Young said at the hearing on President Bush's request for $87 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan Tuesday that he wants to know if it is a common practice.

Young is clearly not finished and called it "an obvious attempt to keep from Congress what was happening. I think that would make you suspicious. It makes me a little suspicious."

more
http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/webnews/wed/dp/Uus-defense-young-analysis.RUt1_DO2.html

[Bolo Boffin]

18. If a road leads to blaming Israelis, SLAD considers it a "real possibility."

:eyes:

[Name removed]

22. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Realityhack]

20. SLAD that is a bit of a wall of text.

Could you summarize what it says and what you think that means?

I have nothing against detailed sourcing. I appreciate the links so I can investigate for myself... but most people start with a summary of some sort.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Realityhack]

24. Can I assume that you...

at least know who you are responding to?

Please tell me how this:

A 1970 graduate of Columbia University with a bachelor's in government, Dr. Zakheim also studied at the London School of Economics. He earned his doctorate in economics and politics at St. Antony's College, University of Oxford, where he was graduate fellow in programs of both the National Science Foundation and Columbia College, and then a research fellow.

relates in any way to 9-11.

[seemslikeadream]

26. It is background information on a fellow who just happened to lose track of a couple trillion

of tax payers money, heck of a job Dov

[Realityhack]

27. Um... ok...

so there is this guy...
who went to school...
and worked a bunch of places...
one of which was the government...
Where he 'lost track of' a bunch of money.

You didn't answer the question of WTF does this have to do with 9-11.

[Realityhack]

28. trillion?

Trillion, billion, or million?

Are you saying he lost track of around $2,000,000,000,000?

[AZCat]

30. He didn't lose any such thing.

With slad, it helps to check other sources. Zakheim was comptroller for the Pentagon when they discovered they had several trillion dollars worth of unaccounted transactions. He helped determine where the money went, and the amount remaining is significantly less.



On Edit: whoops, meant it helps, not doesn't help.

[Realityhack]

31. Thanks AZCat.

Nice to see you on. I knew someone would eventually introduce another rational voice.
Hope things are going well for you.

[AZCat]

33. No problem.

slad's signal-to-noise ratio is sometimes a little high, at least for those of us with non-slad enabled receivers.

Things are okay, although I'm worried about the economy (like everybody else). We're starting to see layoffs in my field, and everybody's watching their backside.

[Realityhack]

35. Figured that might happen.

New construction plans must be in freefall. Hope you ride through ok.

I often (usually?) loose track of the fact that there IS a signal in SLAD's noise. Guess I have the wrong receiver (I think I am thankful for that).

[AZCat]

36. Residential is dead, commercial is hurting...

and lots of institutional work is on hold. We'll all be ok, this has happened before (although not quite so bad). Eventually one learns to have a substantial rainy day fund. Worst case, I just go back to school.

[seemslikeadream]

32. He helped find the money? Link please?

[AZCat]

34. I don't have a link.

I read it in hard copy some time ago, and don't remember which publication. He left several years ago (2004?), and I think it was after that.

[seemslikeadream]

37. Sorry wrong

[AZCat]

38. Sorry incoherent

Have you ever thought about putting a little more effort into your posts? The purpose is to communicate, right?

[Bolo Boffin]

39. Are you honestly suggesting that AZCat is wrong about something he read?

How could you possibly make any such assertion rationally?

Oh, wait...

[AZCat]

40. She might be right - it was a long time ago.

It still would be nice if here posts contained a little more information and a lot less insinuation.

[seemslikeadream]

41. Excuse me you are the one that stated something that was not only wrong but could not link and so

you say oopa!

[AZCat]

42. Incoherent again.

Please try harder to write coherent posts - the rest of us are not mind readers. I don't even know what the heck "oopa!" is.

[seemslikeadream]

43. posts 32 and 41

[Realityhack]

44. SLAD...

you said he lost 2 Trillion dollars. Did he?
Or was he there when they discovered that amount was not accounted for over a longer period of time?

[seemslikeadream]

46. IT WAS HIS FRICKIN JOB TO KEEP TRACK OF IT!

[AZCat]

50. This is where your whole theory falls down on its face.

I know from previous discussions you have difficulty with chronology, but it is important to pay attention to two things: (1) when did the money went unaccounted, and (2) when did Zakheim become comptroller? Because (1) occurred prior to (2), Zakheim is not the reason the money went unaccounted. Instead, he was part of the process to account for the expenditures.

[Realityhack]

70. You dodged the question. n/t

[Realityhack]

45. Also

what the fuck does this have to do with 9-11?

[AZCat]

47. The chance of me finding out whatever point you're trying to make...

depends on the information provided in your posts. I can't understand you when you write brief and confusing posts rife with grammatical and spelling errors. Maybe english isn't your first language, but that doesn't excuse you from the most basic requirement of communication - making clear what you mean. Repeating the same posting technique won't resolve things - you need to change the way you post.

[seemslikeadream]

49. you, SD, bolo and greyl are the only ones that feel that way sorry

ain't gonna change for you, hard to believe but I certainly don't take advice from my adversaries

[AZCat]

51. Fine. Go live in your little fantasy world where your posts make sense.

The rest of us are getting along quite nicely over here in reality, where things like a discussion between anonymous posters on an internet message board is just a little beneath the idea of "adversaries". Honestly, do you think any of this really matters? If so, I feel very sorry for you.

[seemslikeadream]

53. Honestly, do you think any of this really matters?

so you admit this is all just a game for you?

[AZCat]

54. Not at all.

It just doesn't make a difference. In order to do that, you need to get off the computer. You don't make changes in the real world by posting on an internet forum.

[seemslikeadream]

55. OMG

An internet poster is telling me to get off the computer :rofl:

[AZCat]

56. It appears you pay as little attention when reading posts as you do when writing them.

If you go back and reread the post, you'll realize I did not tell you to get off the computer. I couldn't care less how you choose to spend your time. What I did say was that to make a difference you need to get off the computer. Not the same thing at all. Good luck understanding the difference.

[seemslikeadream]

57. You assume way too much

[AZCat]

58. No assuming required - it's empirical. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

60. Maybe if you didn't completely mangle most, if not all, of your posts....

you wouldn't get such critical responses.

[greyl]

67. "adversaries"?

I've believed for a while that your defining of people who reply with criticism to your posts as adversaries could be a main source of much conflict.
It means every time you read a post by those "adversaries" your perception of the post is filtered through that lens so much that you don't see what's really there.

[seemslikeadream]

48. And they all suppose what they want to suppose

I realize this too will be extremely hard for you to follow but this song runs through my mine alot when reading 3 or 4 posters on this forum


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQjtMJ14gzc

Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
they all suppose what they want to suppose when they hear oom pah pah
There's a little ditty they're singin' in the city
Especially when they've been on the gin or the beer
If you've got the patience your own imaginations will tell you just exactly what you want to hear
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
And they all suppose what they want to suppose when they hear oom pah pah

Mr. Percy Snodgrass would often have the odd glass
But never when he thought anybody could see
Secretly he'd buy it, and drink it on the quiet
And dream he was an Earl with a girl on his knee
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
What is the cause of his red shiny nose?
Could it be oom pah pah?

Pretty little Sally goes walking down the alley
Displays her pretty ankles to all of the men
They could see her garters, but not for free and gratis
An inch or two and then she knows when to say when
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
Whether its hidden or whether it shows
It's the same oom pah pah

She was from the country, but now she's up a gumtree
She let a fellow beat her, and lead her along
What's the use of cryin', she made her bed to lie in
She's glad to bring a coin in, and join in this song
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
She is no longer the same blushing rose
Ever since oom pah pah

Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, that's how it goes
Oom pah pah, oom pah pah, everyone knows
And they all suppose what they want to suppose
When they hear oom pah pah

[AZCat]

52. So now you're keeping track.

What's next? Keeping your own version of the DAISY list?

[AZCat]

29. Not the same thing.

The C.I.D. used remote piloting, while the OP is discussing autopiloting. Apples and oranges.

[KDLarsen]

59. I knew this pdf would come in handy

http://911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf

Does a fairly good (albeit rather technical) job of explaining why remote control wouldn't work at all.

[jakeXT]

65. Where were his trained flight crews

3) Remotely guiding Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175 into their respective targets. This solves all of the problems
presented above and then some. But how would it be accomplished, theoretically? Is there an easy way ? Short
answer. No, there is not an easy way to do this for two reasons:
-A very well trained flight crew.


As far as I know, not one of the 4 crews typed/used the hijack code, were did the well trained go? Or am I wrong ?


(7) In addition to the absence of evidence for hijackers on the planes, there is also evidence of their absence: If hijackers had broken into the cockpits, the pilots would have "squawked" the universal hijack code, an act that takes only a couple of seconds. But not one of the eight pilots on the four airliners did this (NPHR 175-79).
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10145

[KDLarsen]

66. Sadly that part was interrupted when their throats were slit

Most of the flight crews would still have been strapped in their seats when the hijackers entered the cockpit, and from that position ones self-defense abilities are severely impaired. Presumably they were busy fighting whoever entered the cockpit off, rather than calmly entering the 4-digit transponder code.

[spooked911]

69. moot point as AA77 never hit the Pentagon

I do like the "33" though