You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Of course you JREF'ers don't believe in small drone planes and them having the ability to fly low to the ground. There are only really really big ones and if they were flying 40' off of the ground they would break apart............
If you have something other than the words of a traitor claiming to have flown a corporate plane there (like an actual eyewitness in the Shanksville area) I'd like to see it.
List of Shanksville area residents who saw a small white drone plane :
Lee Purbaugh Jim Brandt John Fleegle Rick Chaney Dennis Decker Robin Duppstadt Susan Custer Susan McElwain Dale Browning Tom Spinelli Viola Saylor
“The Miami-Dade police department will begin experimenting with high-tech drones as law enforcement tools beginning next year,” reports Local 10. “Although the military has been using unmanned aircraft systems for years, this will be the first time they are used in law enforcement…. Only the Miami-Dade police department and the Houston police department were given permission by the FAA to experiment with the drones.”
All of this is just the beginning, of course. Next up, a special “agile air traffic system” which establishes “routine access to the national airspace for UAVs and other new vehicles,” according to Next Generation Air Transportation System, a plan enacted in 2003 by Bush and Congress under VISION 100 – Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act (P.L. 108-176).
In 2004, “Access 5, a joint government-industry program was initiated. The program brings together NASA, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Defense and six major industry members. Their goal: to plan the safe, orderly and efficient integration of UAVs into civil airspace over the next five years.” In other words, expect UAVs in your neighborhood in the future.
In March of last year, a House of Representatives panel “heard testimony from police agencies that envision using UAVs for everything from border security to domestic surveillance high above American cities. Private companies also hope to use UAVs for tasks such as aerial photography and pipeline monitoring,” Declan McCullagh wrote for CNET News at the time.
In a scene that could have been inspired by the movie “Minority Report,” one North Carolina county is using a UAV equipped with low-light and infrared cameras to keep watch on its citizens. The aircraft has been dispatched to monitor gatherings of motorcycle riders at the Gaston County fairgrounds from just a few hundred feet in the air–close enough to identify faces–and many more uses, such as the aerial detection of marijuana fields, are planned.
Or, as well, photographing those pesky antiwar and anti-globalization demonstrators. In fact, it appears the Pentagon or the Ministry of Homeland Security is one step ahead of local police departments. In September, during an antiwar demo in Lafayette Square, people reported “dragonflies or little helicopters” buzzing around, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
No agency admits to having deployed insect-size spy drones. But a number of U.S. government and private entities acknowledge they are trying. Some federally funded teams are even growing live insects with computer chips in them, with the goal of mounting spyware on their bodies and controlling their flight muscles remotely.
The robobugs could follow suspects, guide missiles to targets or navigate the crannies of collapsed buildings to find survivors.
Call them “beamed power micro UAVs,” as blogger David Hambling does. “Beamed power micro UAVs would have obvious limitations — they’re not going to be flying hundreds of miles away over enemy territory. But for covert surveillance in the domestic arena, they might be just the thing. I have no idea whether there are any dragonfly spies out there yet; but if there aren’t now, there soon will be.”
If the antiwar people in Washington are to believed, little dragonfly-sized snoop drones are already a reality. But then the CIA was cranking out similar devices more than a decade ago.
As for the larger cousins of the micro UAVs, back in December of 2002 Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner said “UAVs could be an effective means of watching the home front in the war on terror” while admitting “they’re quite intrusive,” not that intrusiveness and violating privacy ever concerned our rulers.
Among the agencies now committed to deploying UAVs are the Coast Guard and Border Patrol, both of which are moving to the Homeland Security Department. Other non-Defense Department agencies, such as the Transportation Department, are in the early stages of exploring possible security roles for drones. Meanwhile, the Energy Department, which set up a UAV program in 1993 to study clouds and climate change, has been developing high-altitude instruments to measure radiation in the atmosphere….
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, interest in UAVs among federal agencies has swelled, industry sources said. “There’s been a lot more activity over the last couple of months,” said one manufacturing executive who asked not to be named. “It’s been really intense. We’re doing things now that we wouldn’t have been doing a year ago.”
It appears everybody’s getting in on the action, so why not the local cops?
If you think they government will limit itself to studying clouds and so-called climate change, think again. Remember Operation TIPS, the supposedly stillborn effort to usher in a chapter out of George Orwell’s 1984? The FBI, CIA and NSA have snooped on — and infiltrated and sabotaged — the political opposition for decades (recall COINTELPRO, Operation Chaos, Project MERRIMAC, Project MINARET, Project SHAMROCK, ECHELON, NSA warrantless surveillance, etc., on and on, ad nauseam).
And then there was that confidential FBI memorandum sent to over 15,000 local law enforcement agencies back in October, 2003, urging them to be on the look-out for the “criminal activities” of protesters (for instance, using the “internet to recruit, raise funds, and coordinate … activities prior to demonstrations,” and “[d]uring the course of a demonstration … using cell phones or radios to coordinate activities or to update colleagues about ongoing events,” and other such suspicious behavior). During COINTELPRO in the 60s and early 70s, the FBI kept over 500,000 domestic intelligence files at their headquarters and an undetermined amount at regional offices.
Of course, we are told the drones in Texas — the maiden flight was supposed to be a secret, but an intrepid news team put the kibosh to that — will be used for monitoring traffic. No doubt the UAVs will be used for traffic, as local police are keen to increase revenues, but if history is any indicator, they will be taking orders from the feds as well — and the federal government, like any self-perpetuating leviathan, is interested in not only keeping tabs on political opponents but also destroying them, same as any other criminal organization does to the competition or those who might endanger their livelihood.
There is so much missinformation in the replies to my post that I don't even know where to start.
why don't you start by explaining that you don't believe governments commit conspiracy to mislead the public, but that eyewitnesses to national disasters do.
explain your very selective belief in conspiracy theories.
I was just driving along here. It was a beautiful day. I had the window open; had the stereo on, and when I got up here, almost to the stop sign, this small white plane - at the time, that's what I thought it was - went over top of me.
It was so smooth and it just glided over me, just like that [tilting hand to show and almost vertically banking turn.] And then I ducked, and when I looked up again, then it was the spoiler - which is what I call it - and it was tipped like this [rocks hands back to indicate tipping front up and back down] so I could really see the spoiler.
And then it just banked to the right, then went over and down behind those trees.
We got to watching it on TV and they kept saying that it was a large plane, like a 757. And I was like, no, what I saw was no jet [we assume she is intending 'jumbo jet']. That would have blown me off the road, if it went over me, you know, that close. I sad, na, that wasn't it.
So, like I said, at about 11:30 that night, the FBI came; wanted to talk to me. They kept asking me how big the plane was. And I said the plane, you know, it was small, it wasn't much bigger than my van, that I saw, and it went over top of me. And he says, "you don't know what a 757 looks like". And I said, you know, don't be condescending to me. You know, if you don't want to believe me that's fine, but what I saw, I though I should report, and you aught to know there was something else in the air at the same time this was going on, and you want to make sure it was ours and not somebody else's.
And that's when he did seem to get a little nicer. Told me it was a white Lear Jet. Somebody was taking picture. I said: before the crash? And he says: "Well we gotta go". And that was the end of it.
Quote:
Susan McElwan Per Mirror.co.uk, 9/11/02
Susan Mcelwain, 51, who lives two miles from the site, knows what she saw - the white plane rocketed directly over her head.
"It came right over me, I reckon just 40 or 50ft above my mini-van," she recalled. "It was so low I ducked instinctively. It was travelling real fast, but hardly made any sound.
"Then it disappeared behind some trees. A few seconds later I heard this great explosion and saw this fireball rise up over the trees, so I figured the jet had crashed. The ground really shook. So I dialled 911 and told them what happened.
"I'd heard nothing about the other attacks and it was only when I got home and saw the TV that I realised it wasn't the white jet, but Flight 93.
I didn't think much more about it until the authorities started to say there had been no other plane. The plane I saw was heading right to the point where Flight 93 crashed and must have been there at the very moment it came down.
"There's no way I imagined this plane - it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look.
"It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven't found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn't one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around.
"Then they changed their story and tried to say it was a plane taking pictures of the crash 3,000ft up.
"But I saw it and it was there before the crash and it was 40ft above my head. They did not want my story - nobody here did."
Mrs Mcelwain, who looks after special needs children, is further convinced the whole truth has yet to come out because of a phone call she had within hours from the wife of an air force friend of the family.
"She said her husband had called her that morning and said 'I can't talk, but we've just shot a plane down,' " Susan said. "I presumed they meant Flight 93. I have no doubt those brave people on board tried to do something, but I don't believe what happened on the plane brought it down.
"If they shot it down, or something else happened, everyone, especially the victims' families, have a right to know."
I was just driving along here. It was a beautiful day. I had the window open; had the stereo on, and when I got up here, almost to the stop sign, this small white plane - at the time, that's what I thought it was - went over top of me.
It was so smooth and it just glided over me, just like that [tilting hand to show and almost vertically banking turn.] And then I ducked, and when I looked up again, then it was the spoiler - which is what I call it - and it was tipped like this [rocks hands back to indicate tipping front up and back down] so I could really see the spoiler.
And then it just banked to the right, then went over and down behind those trees.
We got to watching it on TV and they kept saying that it was a large plane, like a 757. And I was like, no, what I saw was no jet [we assume she is intending 'jumbo jet']. That would have blown me off the road, if it went over me, you know, that close. I sad, na, that wasn't it.
So, like I said, at about 11:30 that night, the FBI came; wanted to talk to me. They kept asking me how big the plane was. And I said the plane, you know, it was small, it wasn't much bigger than my van, that I saw, and it went over top of me. And he says, "you don't know what a 757 looks like". And I said, you know, don't be condescending to me. You know, if you don't want to believe me that's fine, but what I saw, I though I should report, and you aught to know there was something else in the air at the same time this was going on, and you want to make sure it was ours and not somebody else's.
And that's when he did seem to get a little nicer. Told me it was a white Lear Jet. Somebody was taking picture. I said: before the crash? And he says: "Well we gotta go". And that was the end of it.
In the above which we have a video interview to confirm those are Mrs. McElwain's words we find that she is telling exactly the same story she told us. There is not a single discrepancy nor is there anything in it to allude to her seeing an A10 thunderbolt that no one else saw.
Now in the following story we have a major discrepancy :
Quote:
Susan McElwan Per Mirror.co.uk, 9/11/02
Susan Mcelwain, 51, who lives two miles from the site, knows what she saw - the white plane rocketed directly over her head.
"It came right over me, I reckon just 40 or 50ft above my mini-van," she recalled. "It was so low I ducked instinctively. It was travelling real fast, but hardly made any sound.
In the interview I released we specifically asked Mrs. McElwain about this account and she states and I quote "I've never used the word reckon in my life."
Continue :
Quote:
"Then it disappeared behind some trees. A few seconds later I heard this great explosion and saw this fireball rise up over the trees, so I figured the jet had crashed. The ground really shook. So I dialled 911 and told them what happened.
In neither filmed interview does Susan ever mention hearing a "great explosion" or any type of explosion that day.
Quote:
"I'd heard nothing about the other attacks and it was only when I got home and saw the TV that I realised it wasn't the white jet, but Flight 93.
Mrs. McElwain did not see a 757 and still believes the white plane to be the plane that crashed there that day.
Quote:
I didn't think much more about it until the authorities started to say there had been no other plane. The plane I saw was heading right to the point where Flight 93 crashed and must have been there at the very moment it came down.
"There's no way I imagined this plane - it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look.
"It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven't found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn't one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around.
Holy shit!?!?!?!?!
Where the hell did this come from?
In both video interviews Mrs. McElwain never once mentions the plane having 2 rear engines. So far in this UK story we have encountered discrepancy after discrepancy in regards to Mrs. McElwain's account.
So I guess we're at a point where we have to make a decision.
Do we believe :
1) GNN & CIT
or
2) UK Mirror Reporter
Since "Hetware" (aka anonymous) wants to start naming people who saw the drone plane I will kindly finish a good part of his list in advance for him :
Lee Purbaugh Tim Lensbourer Tom Spinelli Ruth Ann Fisher Susan Custer Robin Duppstadt Rick Chanay Dennis Decker Susan McElwain Teresa Weyant Jim Brandt John Fleegle
There's more but I'm not going to name people who's accounts are available online at this time.
Come on "Hetware". Please list all the Shanksville eyewitnesses who positively identify a A10 for us. We'll be waiting.....
Ok, because I'm sick of arguing about misinformation regarding the type of plane the white plane was I am going to post the following and I am not naming my source other than to tell you that this individual witnessed the plane after the event.
The witness confirmed the following to me in phone conversations and email exchanges :
1) The plane made no noise 2) It was too small to hold a pilot let alone passengers 3) It was not a corporate falcon jet nor was it an A10 (among an assortment of drone planes) 4) It circled the crash scene for a couple minutes at a very low altitude and then jetted straight up and off in the direction of the sun
While I know the A10 hugger will choose to dismiss this I know those of you who know me will value this information. This witness spent months trying to find the plane they saw on 9/11 on the internet and couldn't. They confirmed to me that to the best of their recollection the plane they saw that morning most resembles the following :
This also explains why some witnesses (like Susan) believe the plane didn't have wings and had a "spoiler".
Ok, because I'm sick of arguing about misinformation regarding the type of plane the white plane was I am going to post the following and I am not naming my source other than to tell you that this individual witnessed the plane after the event.
The witness confirmed the following to me in phone conversations and email exchanges :
1) The plane made no noise 2) It was too small to hold a pilot let alone passengers 3) It was not a corporate falcon jet nor was it an A10 (among an assortment of drone planes) 4) It circled the crash scene for a couple minutes at a very low altitude and then jetted straight up and off in the direction of the sun
While I know the A10 hugger will choose to dismiss this I know those of you who know me will value this information. This witness spent months trying to find the plane they saw on 9/11 on the internet and couldn't. They confirmed to me that to the best of their recollection the plane they saw that morning most resembles the following :
This also explains why some witnesses (like Susan) believe the plane didn't have wings and had a "spoiler".
Bump
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
1:46 PM Dec 6
