Quote:
Originally Posted by fezzic
Prior to the events of 9/11, (to the best of my understanding) US (and most other countries) procedure on hijacking was to cooperate with the hijackers, not fight them. Let them take control, stay alive, and wait for Delta Force or somebody deal with them AFTER the aircraft was landed some place. In general, 9/11 was about the first time, that I am aware of, where the hijackers actually took complete control of the flight controls and flew the plane instead of telling the pilots where to go.
The idea that the passengers and aircrew of an airliner would do something that violates [then] standing rules and would be considered inherently risky (fighting the hijackers) -- before it was burned into our psyche that letting hijackers take control of the aircraft could mean certain death -- is ludicrous.
|
I know several people have already said this, but I have to comment. First, I have been flying planes since the early 1980s. There was a period in the late 70s/early 80s where hijackings were actually fairly common, for example, multiple hijackings of planes to Cuba. What fezzic and others have described, of not fighting the hijackers, is exactly the procedure that was followed.
Second, once the people on the fourth plane learned the fate of the other three planes, they did exactly that, they fought the terrorists, and probably prevented that plane from striking another target in Washington. So how does the crash of the plane in PA jive with your little dream David?
I also would like your response to what I posted in
post 1058. Remember, there was debris and human remains outside of the Pentagon. This could not have been planted before the crash. You need to explain how that was done.