Posted on 01/26/2003 9:28:46 PM PST by Polycarp
Posted here?
Wouldn't that sort of thing fall under the "loose lips" prohibition?
P.S. - thanks for answering my question.
Yeah sure! LOL!
Wouldn't that sort of thing fall under the "loose lips" prohibition?
Drat, silly me. We've violated the loose lips policy folks. Ok everybody, see post #125. Stand up and make a circle facing outward...
I didn't say ECM would cause a plane to be "invisible" to all military radar. This is obviously a sensitive topic, and I won't go into any furthur detail. Let's just say that military jets won't show up on civilian radar if they don't want to be seen.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion as well. I disagree that the image is definitive proof of your position.
Get ten people to witness anything, you'll get different, but reasonably identical versions of the event.
People have been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on the word of a single eyewitness in many instances.
Some are very detail oriented, others incredibly vague. However, there are very evil people in a world that can produce one Saddam Hussein. In that huge spectrum of in-between, many irrational people will always hate, and try to kill YOU, because YOU are the USA.
I don't see the connection, and you're making a huge leap in logic here. I don't think you could justifiably portray the witnesses to the events surrounding Flight 93 as being "irrational people" that will always hate and try to kill.
The USA fills prison death rows with people of the same stripe. Further down that spectrum we have leftists; they despise us because as free people, we prosper.
Although I have no great love of leftists, I'd have to disagree with your assertion that they "despise us because we prosper". I'd say they suffer from fundamentally flawed reasoning, and are seduced by unworkable utopian fantasies.
The skies were not friendly that morning. We were under attack, and the scope of the threat was unknown.
Would you mind sharing your source of this information with me?
Let's just call it an educated assumption.
Perhaps you are wrong? Maybe the threat condition was maintained up until commecial air traffic resumed? From there, perhaps the threat condition gradully ratched down to what we now know as our current "yellow" threat condition?
When it was known that a hijacked airliner was heading towards Washington DC, where two airliners already had impacted the WTC and another had impacted into the Pentagon, I'd say that the threat level was a much higher state than it was later that evening. Any interceptors defending Washington DC that morning would have been effectively flying a combat mission of the highest national security significance.
Would you mind providing a source for that information?
It's common knowledge. Do a Google search on IFF. Basically, the standard transponder can be switched off, just as the terrorists had done on the hijacked flights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.