On Hijackings With Boxcutters
It's not that they can't be done; I'm sure airline personnel were trained to not resist too much to normal hijackings.
The problem is, I don't see how a terrorist armed with a small knive/boxcutter gets large air force veterans to get out of their pilots' seats.
I just can't see that any pilot would give up the controls of their ship without a fight. And I don't see how terrorists armed with small knives/boxcutters takes out 8 out of 8 pilots in a fight.
The only other option is that the terrorists take the two pilots by surprise, sneak into the cockpit and cut their throats. Even if this works perfectly, this means blood all over the controls and also that the terrorists have to lug the bodies out of the seats and are prone to counter-attack during this time.
But again, how likely is it that this strategy will work on three out of three planes (*officially* there was a struggle in the flight 93 cockpit)? More importantly, would real terrorists count on this working perfectly?
The surprise attack counts on that not one flight attendant will phone the cockpit and warn them of an intrusion, not to mention the fact that the hijackers have to get lucky and find the cockpit door unlocked (not the case on flight 93 we know) OR they take the cockpit key from the lead flight attendant by force without the cockpit being alerted OR they smash down the locked cockpit door, which surely should alert the pilots to the intrusion and negate the surprise attack.
But *officially*, on four out of four planes, terrorists armed only with knives and box cutters took over the cockpit without one pilot or flight attendant turning on the hijack alarm.
I don't buy it and neither should anyone else.
The problem is, I don't see how a terrorist armed with a small knive/boxcutter gets large air force veterans to get out of their pilots' seats.
I just can't see that any pilot would give up the controls of their ship without a fight. And I don't see how terrorists armed with small knives/boxcutters takes out 8 out of 8 pilots in a fight.
The only other option is that the terrorists take the two pilots by surprise, sneak into the cockpit and cut their throats. Even if this works perfectly, this means blood all over the controls and also that the terrorists have to lug the bodies out of the seats and are prone to counter-attack during this time.
But again, how likely is it that this strategy will work on three out of three planes (*officially* there was a struggle in the flight 93 cockpit)? More importantly, would real terrorists count on this working perfectly?
The surprise attack counts on that not one flight attendant will phone the cockpit and warn them of an intrusion, not to mention the fact that the hijackers have to get lucky and find the cockpit door unlocked (not the case on flight 93 we know) OR they take the cockpit key from the lead flight attendant by force without the cockpit being alerted OR they smash down the locked cockpit door, which surely should alert the pilots to the intrusion and negate the surprise attack.
But *officially*, on four out of four planes, terrorists armed only with knives and box cutters took over the cockpit without one pilot or flight attendant turning on the hijack alarm.
I don't buy it and neither should anyone else.
posted by spooked at 2:40 PM
16 Comments:
You don't buy it because you're a paranoid idiot. Hundreds of real experts from within government and private industry have looked at the evidence. No one came up with the same kooky ideas that you have.
Let's see some proof please...
oh joy-- a new troll. A racist one, too, judging by his blog.
by the way, the proof is common sense. And all the experts and professionals have LOTS of reasons to talk the official line. Airline pilots can have their jobs and their pensions cut quite easily-- just like NYFD.
hey, it was evil muslims! that's all you need to know! they're so evil that their magic boxcutters can make a 767 enter another dimension at the last moment so it can slip thru a steel and concrete building without encountering any resistance- like a ghost! - not only that they can transform an engine from that 767 so that when it emerges from the other side of said steel and concrete building it has somehow become an engine from a 737 - -
go peddle your hatred on your own blog where it belongs stein!
read this blog and it's plethora of archives for a factual account of a plane that behaves in an impossible manner -
and the official 911 fairytale is the stupidest conspiracy theory of them all, dipshit - and I haven't seen ANY proof from you official morons -
Proof of what? The official media videos show a plane slipping through the side of WTC tower #2 as if it was a cartoon. You are the moron and the dipshit.
Yes, we are suggesting that!
Yes, I know, we're craaazy.
So go away and leave us alone now.
Come spooked....come see all the FUN I'm having in the comments section over @:
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/
Apparantly...all this 'smasher' knows is curses & insults.
smasher, when YOU look at a clip of 175 actually impacting the south tower (there are only 4 different ones), what do YOU see?
I'll tell you what I see (I'm stuck with dial-up and I can still see it) - flight175 slips thru the side of the tower without meeting ANY resistance whatsoever - it looks like a cartoon or a ghost - go here:: webfairy.org and look at the impacts.
smasher -
people who have actually looked at the physical evidence - folks with structural engineering degrees
really. and what have these folks determined? have they determined that an aluminum plane can go right thru a steel building like a knife thru butter? but I asked you what YOU see when you look at it...should I assume that you haven't looked at it? can you and your anonymous folks answer this question please? ::
why did the fragile wingtips of flight175 cut thru the steel beams while the much more robust tail assembly disappeared without a trace?
image2
this is even more pronounced with flight11 -
image1
all your sneering and refusals don't make things other than they are -
oh I made a mistake - I said:
fragile wingtips of flight175 cut thru the steel beams
when in fact the hole was too small by almost 40 ft. - which means that almost 20 ft. of each aluminum wing (as well as the tail assembly) disappeared into thin air rather than cutting thru the heavy steel outer columns.
welcome smasher...
i think what all this really boils down to is who is convincing you that muslims hijacked planes, flew them into the WTC towers, and the jet-fueled fires eventually brought the towers down? if you're convinced from reading the NIST paper, the FEMA paper, and 9/11 comission report then good for you; see you in the pasture with the rest of the sheeple. but if you're willing to look at the facts yourself, not be spoon fed a conclusion but rather draw your own, then you might realize what we here have realized.
99 percent of the population refuses to think for themselves and instead is content to watch the brainwashing tube (television) and listen to whatever big brother teaches them.
honestly, we all want to believe the official report. no one here wants to live in a world where the gov't was behind the entire 9/11 plot and covered up thier tracks afterwards. but we do live in that world...
so smasher, bring us some evidence. instead of spitting off claims that "people who have actually looked at the physical evidence - folks with structural engineering degrees" back the 9/11 'official story', why don't you answer some of the hard questions, fill in some of the huge holes that we all can plainly see exist the the 'official story'. explain to us how molten metal was found beneath three towers weeks later. explain to us how a building can be brought down by a fire. explain to us how the massive core columns of the WTC towers could be ejected out and land on the roofs of neighboring towers?
bottom line, anyone who has done real research is gonna arrive at these same questions and have the same doubts we all have about the 'official story'. and this isn't in depth research that only a select few can do. anyone can. want facts? why don't you head over to st911.org. these guys have some killer papers with some hard evidence. got more questions? google 'em up and start reading. still have more questions? then come back here, with some knowledge, and join the debate.
take a look how smasher really breaks the theories wide open and gets down the dirty with the facts in this post. he is quick to point out that nearly all the passengers on flight 77 where positively identified using DNA testing and uses this fact as proof that flight 77 hit the pentagon. he also conviently leaves out the important point that no aircraft parts were recovered from the pentagon and that the plane vaporized. he also leaves out that the doctors who preformed DNA testing are the same clowns the gov't brought in to cleanup after the Oklahoma City bombing. the plane can be vaporized, but nearly all the passengers fragile DNA remains intact for identification by the same doctors the gov't used in Oklahoma.
point made.
rant complete.
that is your evidence smasher? ha ha - one picture of one piece of some fuselage or other? odd that when you look at the pictures of that same piece of fuselage in this photo studies you see that it's been moved around and staged/posed - and equally odd was the ASCE's "pentagon building performance report" which was proven to be false LINK
oh, and is this the damage that the 757 did? - come on man, get with the program.
there are numerous pictures of many pieces. Only a brain-dead doofus could believe that these were "staged"...
really? when the same piece turns up in different locations it does seem like they were staged - and when a vehicle is white in some photos but substituted with a green vehicle in other photos of the same location it tends to make people think they were staged as well - and when the official story claims that "the plane was vaporized yet human remains were not" people tend to question the validity of the official story, so when the official story then changes to: "the 757 slid all the way inside the pentagon and that's why it wasn't seen in any photos" people wonder why that doesn't jibe with a thorough analyses of the angles of approach and the actual damage to the pentagon and the general vicinity. (click the LINK in my previous comment) - are you starting to see a pattern here? the official story about 911 has all the merit of a fairytale - that is the reality of 911 - if you truly were interested in smashing a conspiracy you might open your eyes a little wider first.
now I'm done and you can believe what you want.
Only a "brain-dead doofus" could still believe in the utter Fairy Tale that is the Govt's version of 9/11/01.
Which is by the way, if you didn't already realize...IS ITSELF A CONSPIRICY THEORY!!! (and a STILL UNPROVEN ONE AT THAT)
Funny how you choose to believe the Govt's Conspiricy Theory, "Conspiricy Smasher" (which has so many holes in it you could fly planes full of phony Arab "Terrorists" through it) and ignore the mountian of evidence to the contrary.
Tell me...does "Government Shill" pay well??
hehe
you really are high aren't you? - oh well, I'm sure you've got a lot of conspiracies to smash -
Post a Comment
<< Home