.:.:.:.:
RTTP
.
Mobile
:.:.:.:.
[
<--back
] [
Home
][
Pics
][
News
][
Ads
][
Events
][
Forum
][
Band
][
Search
]
full forum
|
bottom
Reply
[
login
]
SPAM Filter:
re-type this
(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
you are quoting a heck of a lot there.
[QUOTE]blah blah blah[/QUOTE] to reply to PatMeebles.
Please remove excess text as not to re-post tons
message
[QUOTE="PatMeebles:432357"]One more for the night. PM talks about the one interception of a civilian aircraft in the decade before 9/11. Serendipity says that 67 incidents of interception occured. But they lump interception with alerts. They even admit that they're only "assuming" that intercepts were involved. Maybe a radio malfunction, guys? They also assume that all these flights were civilian. What about commercial or cargo planes? Then they quote some guy writing a letter talking about how practice procedures were commonplace for these kinds of incidents. Then he really goes loony when he says [QUOTE] Thousands of sorties run in response to threats, practice runs, false alarms, done weekly or daily over 20 years. Back in the late seventies the NY Post ran an article about the Port Authority bragging how their manned 24/7 response helicopter would be in the air within 4 minutes of an alert call going out per possible air threat to the WTC towers. There is [only] one occasion that I am aware of, or in most probabilities that any one else is aware of, in this exemplary record of response to air threats covering a period of over twenty years that the intercepts did not launch and were told to stand down, after going on high alert within a minute or two of the threat, not from just one threat but then two. That date was 9/11/01.[/QUOTE] Where the hell did he manage to jump from point A to point B in that argument? Once again, the reason NORAD screwed up was precisely that: IT SCREWED UP.[/QUOTE]
top
[
Vers. 0.12
][ 0.005 secs/8 queries][
refresh
][