CIA threatens "Press for Truth" producers over release of new documentary

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

And no publicly recorded reprimands.

MM

What exactly are they to be reprimanded for? Not knowing what was going to happen?

I bet you also ignore this point.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

I... And no publicly recorded reprimands. ...

What would be the reprimand for taking back an aircraft from terrorists? Is it against the law to stand up to terrorists?

The USA shot down one plane on 911. Flight 93 Passengers figure out 911 in minutes (you have how many years to go to do that task?), stood up and took action. Took Action, something 911 truth has failed to do for 11 plus years, save the smart truthers who joined reality and lived up to their goal to be critical thinking humans, people who think for themselves.

Ignore reality, have the CD fantasy, be like "Press for Truth", faking news, making silly headlines not ready for reality.

Originally Posted by DGM

What exactly are they to be reprimanded for? Not knowing what was going to happen?

I bet you also ignore this point.

Reprimanded for not telling the future. Is there a reprimand for making false news?

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by 000063

"http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Payne_Stewart
Oh, look, 76 minutes to intercept Payne Stewart. 76 is bigger than 38.

This is the point where you move the goalposts to the subject of "reprimands"."

Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?

MM

[Justin39640]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?

MM

You make it seem like there were only four planes in the air, all recognized as hostile at the same moment (before some took off), and that fighters can be anywhere, anytime over the US.

These things aren't so.

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?

MM

Are you upset you don't know how long it would take to shadow a hijacked aircraft over the USA?

Topic is fake headlines by "Press for Truth".

Originally Posted by Miragememories

...
It is clear that the U.S. Military had a clear appreciation that a terrorist attack utilizing hijacked commercial aircraft was credible and a serious national defense concern.

...

How did they know Payne Stewart's Plane was not hijacked? The same as 11 and 175, just stopped talking to ATC. Flt 11 looked like a lost electric flight, a major emergency, which ATC would clear a path for the plane to go. Since 11 left it's flight plan, ATC would think it was a major emergency, the pilot wants to land now. It took time to figure out hijacking, and then more time to figure out it was a multi-aircraft attack, not hijackings, murder and crash aircraft.

Until 175 hits, it was not known to be a terrorists attack, then it was the most likely, and anyone who paid attention knew it was associated with UBL.

The only reason the military showed interest in a hijacking, it meant flying, following an airliner, something to do instead of sitting alert; have you sat alert? How many hours do you have on alert? I have thousands of hours, and flying is preferable to sitting alert.

77 had disappeared, and was not found until after hitting the Pentagon. How do you intercept a plane you don't know is there?

All four planes would crash on 911 no matter what; unless the Passengers took the cockpit back in seconds. Who is that bad, mean, that much of a killer to take back the cockpit and kill who stands in the way? No one was prepared for the ultimate hate by 19 terrorists on 911. They hate the west so much they killed fast and blitzed the cockpit, killed the pilots, and crew as needed to fake a hijacking.

Originally Posted by Miragememories

08:20 a.m.The Federal Aviation Administration's Boston Center flight controllers decide that Flight 11 has probably been hijacked. ...

You use history commons? From MSM with extra stupid comments thrown in by 911 truth nuts? You can't source this, and it is not universally true. You make up absolutes from hearsay.

911 truth can't figure out what was figured out in minutes by Flight 93 Passengers. Why post more nonsense in a thread about fake 911 truth nonsense?

[Myriad]

Using the Truthers' logic, if a bank gets robbed in Baltimore at 8:15 AM, and another bank gets robbed in Philadelphia at 9:30 AM, the police must be in on it. Because they had well over an hour warning about that second one.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Triterope]

So, 15 months after this "CIA threatens documentary producers" thread was started:

• The producers haven't been killed, arrested, charged with anything, or harmed in any way.
• Their information is back on the Internet.
• The only evidence of CIA contact is a polite request to include a reply from those accused in the film, and the correspondence exchange concerning that.
• The world could care less.

Par for the course with these people.

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by Myriad

Using the Truthers' logic, if a bank gets robbed in Baltimore at 8:15 AM, and another bank gets robbed in Philadelphia at 9:30 AM, the police must be in on it. Because they had well over an hour warning about that second one.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Using your ridiculous logic, it would be more like two sensational bank robberies occur several minutes apart.

These banks are all in an area which is supposedly protected by the world's largest and best equipped police force.

A half an hour after the first bank robbery, the police are alerted that another bank in the same area is being robbed.

Another half an hour passes, and the well-alerted police force have still not arrived on the scene.

Afterwards when the police are left with four robbed banks, and having never seen, let alone apprehended the robbers, they say it was a lapse, unforeseen etc etc and no one in this magnificent police force gets reprimanded for this massive performance failure.

MM

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Using your ridiculous logic, it would be more like two sensational bank robberies occur several minutes apart.

These banks are all in an area which is supposedly protected by the world's largest and best equipped police force.

A half an hour after the first bank robbery, the police are alerted that another bank in the same area is being robbed.

Another half an hour passes, and the well-alerted police force have still not arrived on the scene.

Afterwards when the police are left with four robbed banks, and having never seen, let alone apprehended the robbers, they say it was a lapse, unforeseen etc etc and no one in this magnificent police force gets reprimanded for this massive performance failure.

MM

Passengers of Flight 93 stopped the terrorists. It seem the USA did 100 percent stopping the terrorists after their plot was figured out in minutes by Flight 93 Passengers, a feat you have failed at for 11 years plus. Once a few Americans knew what the plot was, they stood up and took action. What is your excuse for failing to figure out 911, and not able to take action? You can't take action because you have a fantasy of an inside job, people you can't name, etc, etc, etc. 11 years?

I propose, it takes exactly the time it took for Flt 93 Heroes to stand up, to figure out 911 and take action. Add time to intercept, and you have it; Flt 93 passengers had zero time to intercept, they were first to contact and stop the plot. I have reality to back up my claim, you have nothing to back up your claims, save a lot of ignorance on flying and NORAD/USAF/USA.

There are no combat patrols over the USA before 911. No police in the sky with aircraft capable of flying at speeds airliners can do.

Oh, the attack was confirmed after 175 hit, in NYC, and you think a plane off RADAR, 77, can be found after it pops up unidentified in DC? You sure think everyone should be all knowing. We all know the future. Good one.

After 911, we knew exactly who murdered people, they had to use their names to fly. We have some of their DNA, they are DEAD. The USAF had no mission to shoot down domestic airliners before 911. But go ahead, spin your story as you fail to get on topic, and prefer to make up stuff, like "Press for Truth" does, for attention, to spread nonsense.

Quote:

having never seen, let alone apprehended the robbers

We got their DNA, they are dead. This is nonsense. But go ahead, make some more nonsensical analogies. The flight crew called in by seat number who did the killing, did you miss her phone call? 19 were identified, quickly, because they used aircraft as weapons, murdered aircrew by cutting their throats. Where have you been for 11 years?

You have posted hearsay to support you view of 911.

[LSSBB]

Originally Posted by Triterope

So, 15 months after this "CIA threatens documentary producers" thread was started:

• The producers haven't been killed, arrested, charged with anything, or harmed in any way.
• Their information is back on the Internet.
• The only evidence of CIA contact is a polite request to include a reply from those accused in the film, and the correspondence exchange concerning that.
• The world could care less.

Par for the course with these people.

And the director of the CIA resigned because of, well, distractions.

CT thinks of the American government as some super efficient repression machine. Then the truth comes out. Must be all a show to make 'em look bad to fool the 'sheeple'.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?

MM

So, you really have no problem with the response to AA11 or UA175?

All you have to do now is show that someone obstructed the response to the other two planes.

You can do this right? You want these people to be held responsible.

I won't hold my breath.

[Justin39640]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Using your ridiculous logic, it would be more like two sensational bank robberies occur several minutes apart.

These banks are all in an area which is supposedly protected by the world's largest and best equipped police force.

A half an hour after the first bank robbery, the police are alerted that another bank in the same area is being robbed.

Another half an hour passes, and the well-alerted police force have still not arrived on the scene.

Afterwards when the police are left with four robbed banks, and having never seen, let alone apprehended the robbers, they say it was a lapse, unforeseen etc etc and no one in this magnificent police force gets reprimanded for this massive performance failure.

MM

You're equating the distance between banks in the downtown area of a town to the distance between upstate New York and SE Ohio????????? You're joking right?

[000063]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?

MM

What I'm saying is that there was no time to intercept the plane before the crash.

I asked you for this information before, and you ignored the question, despite quoting it, as I pointed out in the post you responded to.

By your own admission, there were only about 40 minutes between the Mayday and the crash in the Official Story. Yet the only other comparable intercept before 9/11 took over a half-hour longer than that. You need to explain where you think that time should've vanished to. Explain, in detail, how the alert would've shaved off over a half-hour and change.

I don't think you will.

I don't think you can.

[Clayton Moore]

Originally Posted by plague311

Not to seem like Mr. Knowitall, but part of the conspiracy theory is that the government knew this was coming. In all honesty, if the government had been made aware that a terrorist act was going to happen involving planes being used as missiles, wouldn't it be perfectly reasonable to assume they'd run drills on it?

I haven't seen this come up in a long time, but doesn't that make perfect sense to people. If the government was warned this could happen in upcoming days, then they actually were taking it seriously, and decided to run some drills to come up with an idea of how to defend against it.

On the same day? What a coincidence.

Didn't someone in this thread say Norad wasn't charged/tasked with dealing with hijacked airliners.


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...ad#post8759058

http://911review.com/means/standdown.html

Quote:

If it is true that the standing orders would have required approval by the Secretary of Defense for intercepts on 9/11/01, then, in theory, a defacto stand-down could have been implemented by the secretary simply failing to act during the crisis. However, it is doubtful that insiders planning the attack would have relied on the orders alone to assure that there was no effective military response to the attack. It was likely one of a number of "fixes" that included multiple war games planned on the day of the attack. Thus, even if commanders violated standing orders and ordered intercepts of the commandeered jetliners, they would face depleted interceptor resources and corrupted flight data.

[000063]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

...
Unlike expatriate Cubans hijacking and diverting flights to Havana, Islamic terrorists were not known for their willingness to peacefully cooperate with authority. ...
MM

Hang on, I missed this. Was the government even aware, past a reasonable doubt, that Islamic terrorists were behind the attacks, by the time they got the Flight 93 mayday? Please provide evidence.

[000063]

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore

On the same day? What a coincidence.

Except that those were more general hijacking drills, not specifically planes as weapons, as I said in the post right after that one.

Quote:

Didn't someone in this thread say Norad wasn't charged/tasked with dealing with hijacked airliners.


http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...ad#post8759058

No.

"...NORAD was , in 2001, tasked with looking solely at aircraft coming INTO the continental USA,..."

Nothing about them not handling hijacked aircraft at all. Nice job demonstrating your reading comprehension.

Quote:

http://911review.com/means/standdown.html

Quote:

If it is true that the standing orders would have required approval by the Secretary of Defense for intercepts on 9/11/01, then, in theory, a defacto stand-down could have been implemented by the secretary simply failing to act during the crisis. However, it is doubtful that insiders planning the attack would have relied on the orders alone to assure that there was no effective military response to the attack. It was likely one of a number of "fixes" that included multiple war games planned on the day of the attack. Thus, even if commanders violated standing orders and ordered intercepts of the commandeered jetliners, they would face depleted interceptor resources and corrupted flight data.

Yes, use conspiracy websites to back you up, we're all familiar. I highlighted all the sentences with bits that indicate supposition, doubt, or just plain making stuff up.

You'll note that it's every sentence.

That link prevents nothing more than the same incredulity you and MM specialize, nay, wallow in. Heck, even with the procedure in question, there is no evidence whatsoever that the waters required any muddying. It baldly asserts that "it was likely" the silt was stirred up. Any one of the planes reaching their target would count as a victory for the terrorists. That's why they launched their attacks at about the same time; in order to leave less time to respond. They simply didn't count on the passengers fighting back.

I find it odd that the conspirators were so good that they fooled even the pilots, much like no FDNY member who was there on 9/11 doubts the official story. Indeed, so beguiling is it that the latter will actively defend it, sometimes with threats of violence.

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by 000063

"http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Payne_Stewart
Oh, look, 76 minutes to intercept Payne Stewart. 76 is bigger than 38.

This is the point where you move the goalposts to the subject of "reprimands"."

Originally Posted by Miragememories

"Your "Payne Stewart" example, so often cited, might be comparable, if two planes had flown into the WTC Twin Towers back in 1999.

Or are you suggesting that after both WTC Towers were struck, that the alert status of the U.S. Air Defenses was unchanged?"

Originally Posted by 000063

"What I'm saying is that there was no time to intercept the plane before the crash.

I asked you for this information before, and you ignored the question, despite quoting it, as I pointed out in the post you responded to.

By your own admission, there were only about 40 minutes between the Mayday and the crash in the Official Story. Yet the only other comparable intercept before 9/11 took over a half-hour longer than that. You need to explain where you think that time should've vanished to. Explain, in detail, how the alert would've shaved off over a half-hour and change.

I don't think you will.

I don't think you can."

So you are acknowledging that after having become aware of the earlier hijackings which culminated in sensational WTC Tower crashes, the U.S. Air Defenses, particularly in the Eastern Seaboard area, would have gone to a heightened state of preparedness?

The Mayday for Flight93 came in at @0928.

42 minutes after Flight11 struck WTC1.
25 minutes after Flight 175 struck WTC2.

The Payne Stewart Lear jet intercept would not have received a very high threat assessment by the U.S. Air Defenses, especially when compared to a Boeing 757 issuing a Mayday call, half an hour after two Boeing 757's had crashed into the WTC Twin Towers.

MM

[000063]

I'd like a CT to explain why the official story had 93 forced down by passenger resistance instead of a shoot-down. If you want to justify increased security and defense power, wouldn't it be a better idea to be able to go "look, we were able to stop one of the planes! Just think what we could've done with more!"

Of course, then Truthers would be saying that it caught the plane too quickly.

[000063]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

So you are acknowledging that after having become aware of the earlier hijackings which culminated in sensational WTC Tower crashes, the U.S. Air Defenses, particularly in the Eastern Seaboard area, would have gone to a heightened state of preparedness?

If you would like to assert something, feel free, as long as you back it up. You're trying to bait me into an assertion so you can nitpick and question it while ignoring the questions I've been asking you.

Here's an assertion; you will not be able to prove that what you describe as "US Air Defenses" should have been able to intercept the plane within 40 minutes on September 11th, 2001. I also asserted that you ignored my question about similar intercept times because you were unwilling to look for them, or realized that they would harm your argument. You formed your opinion on how long the times should take without considering previous, y'know, actual intercept times.

Quote:

The Mayday for Flight93 came in at @0928.

42 minutes after Flight11 struck WTC1.
25 minutes after Flight 175 struck WTC2.

The Payne Stewart Lear jet intercept would not have received a very high threat assessment by the U.S. Air Defenses, especially when compared to a Boeing 757 issuing a Mayday call, half an hour after two Boeing 757's had crashed into the WTC Twin Towers.

MM

That's not an explanation as to where the half hour would've gone in your assessment. You are implying that the response time would've been cut almost in half. You're not asserting it, of course. In fact, you're very carefully talking around a direct assertion.

I doubt you'd be able to find any intercept not in a time of war that took forty minutes or less, in the history of powered flight in the United States. That's right, I'm challenging you to find anyone in US history, since Kitty Hawk, who was intercepted in less than 40 minutes by authorities, counting from when they realized it was a problem, with planes that had to be alerted and launched from a base.

And if you do provide one or more, I'm going to ask you why you ignored my question earlier about other intercept times.

[cjnewson88]

Talk about beating a dead horse, its common knowledge NEADS did not have the time, information, or coordination to find or intercept, and especially to engage, any of the aircraft on 9/11. All anyone has to do is listen to channel 2 and 7 of the NEADS tapes to hear this. Truthers like MM and CM live in a world of hindsight, divorced from reality, a world without inefficiency, confusion, fog of war, chain of command, SOP, a world of invulnerability, where it is impossible for a determined group to inflict a perfect blow against his enemy, where the government is this all powerful entity to see and stop everything yet at the same time is totally incompetent. 99% of people recognise the world isn't like this, truthers claim to have 'woken up', oh the irony. Truthers live in fantasy, the real world debunks their delusions. The real world allows for a group of radicals to spend years preparing and planning every aspect of their surprise attack, to be able to hijack 4 aircraft and crash them in under an hour, causing mass chaos and confusion, hindering any chance of response or prevention. You can't deny reality, truthers only fool themselves by doing so.

Thankfully the 9/11 Commission Report sums it up;

[beachnut]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

So you are acknowledging that after having become aware of the earlier hijackings which culminated in sensational WTC Tower crashes, the U.S. Air Defenses, particularly in the Eastern Seaboard area, would have gone to a heightened state of preparedness?

The Mayday for Flight93 came in at @0928.

42 minutes after Flight11 struck WTC1.
25 minutes after Flight 175 struck WTC2.

The Payne Stewart Lear jet intercept would not have received a very high threat assessment by the U.S. Air Defenses, especially when compared to a Boeing 757 issuing a Mayday call, half an hour after two Boeing 757's had crashed into the WTC Twin Towers.

MM

There was no 757 issuing a mayday call with a call-sign. If 93 issued a call, it would have 93 in the call; they were being killed, they did not get off their call-sign; you don't understand flying.

How many lies did you put in this one?

What mayday? Where was 93? How could they intercept a plane they did not know was there? Good luck with this one. Who had 93 on RADAR? Who knew 93 was taken by terrorists, and when did they know? Who knew where 93 was going? How far away from the target, which target, was 93 when passengers attacked the terrorists?

What would "Press for Truth" do? Make up more nonsense? Who had 93 on RADAR?

[tsig]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Using your ridiculous logic, it would be more like two sensational bank robberies occur several minutes apart.

These banks are all in an area which is supposedly protected by the world's largest and best equipped police force.

A half an hour after the first bank robbery, the police are alerted that another bank in the same area is being robbed.

Another half an hour passes, and the well-alerted police force have still not arrived on the scene.

Afterwards when the police are left with four robbed banks, and having never seen, let alone apprehended the robbers, they say it was a lapse, unforeseen etc etc and no one in this magnificent police force gets reprimanded for this massive performance failure.

MM

Your scenario has nothing to do with reality.

For one thing the "robbers" are all dead.

Another is that it assumes the "police forces" knew the locations of the "banks".

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by tsig

Your scenario has nothing to do with reality.

For one thing the "robbers" are all dead.

Another is that it assumes the "police forces" knew the locations of the "banks".

MM's analogy requires mobile banks. Now that is ridiculous logic.

[OCaptain]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

bolding is mine

It is clear that the U.S. Military had a clear appreciation that a terrorist attack utilizing hijacked commercial aircraft was credible and a serious national defense concern.

Unlike expatriate Cubans hijacking and diverting flights to Havana, Islamic terrorists were not known for their willingness to peacefully cooperate with authority.

Even if they were extremely reluctant to shoot down their own aircraft, there is little argument that explains why they couldn't put at least one of those 4 commercial airliners in their crosshairs.

And possibly even more incomprehensible, especially when looking at history, no one in responsibility was ever fired or demoted for this gigantic National Security failure!

MM

Untrue. The FAA head was fired over gross negligence.

[Justin39640]

It's devoid of logic.

[000063]

So, let's recap; MM is saying that they not only could intercept 93 in half the time it took to intercept Stewart, but they could do so despite not actually knowing where the plane was when the Mayday came in, or even which plane.

Also, he was wrong about no one being fired.

I predict he runs away from the thread, and comes back when its moved on and he can make his usual drive-by. Like other Truthers, I can see why he prefers skirmishes to direct engagement.

[Miragememories]

Originally Posted by 000063

"...There had been previous drills involving planes as missiles, yes, ...."

Originally Posted by Miragememories

"It is clear that the U.S. Military had a clear appreciation that a terrorist attack utilizing hijacked commercial aircraft was credible and a serious national defense concern....Even if they were extremely reluctant to shoot down their own aircraft, there is little argument that explains why they couldn't put at least one of those 4 commercial airliners in their crosshairs."

Originally Posted by OCaptain

Untrue. The FAA head was fired over gross negligence.

I was not aware that the FAA was a department of the U.S. Military?

But they were a convenient scapegoat.

MM

[000063]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

bolding is mine

It is clear that the U.S. Military had a clear appreciation that a terrorist attack utilizing hijacked commercial aircraft was credible and a serious national defense concern.
....
And possibly even more incomprehensible, especially when looking at history, no one in responsibility was ever fired or demoted for this gigantic National Security failure!

MM

Originally Posted by Miragememories

I was not aware that the FAA was a department of the U.S. Military?

But they were a convenient scapegoat.

MM

That's strange. You seem to have omitted a portion when you quoted your earlier post. Which is especially odd, considering OCaptain quoted that portion. You said "no one in responsibility" was fired, which includes the FAA.

I look forward to seeing how you shuck and jive.

You also quote-mined me. As the person who wrote the sentence, you need the whole thing to get the full message.

Quote:

There had been previous drills involving planes as missiles, yes, but that's not evidence of foreknowledge.

And, gosh, still no explanation as to why you think the response time should have been cut in half.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by beachnut

There was no 757 issuing a mayday call with a call-sign. If 93 issued a call, it would have 93 in the call; they were being killed, they did not get off their call-sign; you don't understand flying.

How many lies did you put in this one?

What mayday? Where was 93? How could they intercept a plane they did not know was there? Good luck with this one. Who had 93 on RADAR? Who knew 93 was taken by terrorists, and when did they know? Who knew where 93 was going? How far away from the target, which target, was 93 when passengers attacked the terrorists?

What would "Press for Truth" do? Make up more nonsense? Who had 93 on RADAR?

In reading MM's posts in which he repeatedly mentions a mayday call I too was wondering why MM does not seem inclined to post the exact transcript of that call.

A mayday without call sign or any other way to immediately identify the caller is certainly not going to help in any immediate response by interceptors. Its a big sky and even if one reduces the volume of sky in which aircraft would be on that frequency its still a huge place to look for an aircraft.

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by Miragememories

Using your ridiculous logic, it would be more like two sensational bank robberies occur several minutes apart.

Okay, two sensational bank robberies, in different states, occurring several minutes apart. I'll go with that. So, you think that would mean the police were in on it, because the first one didn't serve as sufficient warning of the second one?

There are about fifteen times as many bank branches in the U.S. as there are planes in flight over the U.S. at any given time. On the other hand, banks are a lot easier to police and protect; after all, they stay in one place. Reaching one to warn it or check its status requires only a telephone call, and getting an LEO to one can be done in a few minutes via a $20,000 patrol car (if not on foot or by bicycle). No multi-million-dollar military aircraft, trained combat pilots, or elaborate long-range radio communication systems are needed.

So, when one bank is robbed, and every other bank in the country isn't immediately locked down to protect them and their customers from the possibility that there might be multiple robbers active, does that mean the police are incompetent or apathetic?

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Oystein]

I think the analogy with bank robberies nationwide isn't a good one - especially since there are thousands upon thousand of police precincts, and each of them has police officers on alert at any one time.

Also, I suggest that once it was determined that one plane had crashed and at least one other was hijacked, it wasn't unreasonable to start thinking about how to protect all planes currently in the air ASAP.


Oh, incidentally, this is what happened!


I suggest a sligtly different scenario:

We are in a large city with many (a hundred perhaps) branch banks, and because the mayor and city council had cut down badly on police alertness, only two police cars manned with two cops each was available.

A bank robbery begins, someone calls the police somewhat belatedly. A police car is dispatched. Long before it gets there, the robbers start a suicidal amok run. Around that time, another bank on the same street is reported as being robbed. There is confusion if it's the same or a different bank. Anyway, police car continues driving there, but comes too late, another amok shooting occurs.
The second police car is dispatched, and all over town, policemen start getting ready to man more police cars as word preads that something bigger is going on. But where to send the two police cars we have on dispatch already? A third bank is reported, a fourth, even a fifth.
Where to send police when it is spread so thinly and we have so many banks in town?

[jaydeehess]

All analogies break down when too much detail is expected to coincide with the situation to which it is being compared.
If the analogy breaks down quickly perhaps a different analogy is required.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Oystein

I think the analogy with bank robberies nationwide isn't a good one - especially since there are thousands upon thousand of police precincts, and each of them has police officers on alert at any one time.

Also, I suggest that once it was determined that one plane had crashed and at least one other was hijacked, it wasn't unreasonable to start thinking about how to protect all planes currently in the air ASAP.


Oh, incidentally, this is what happened!


I suggest a sligtly different scenario:

We are in a large city with many (a hundred perhaps) branch banks, and because the mayor and city council had cut down badly on police alertness, only two police cars manned with two cops each was available.

A bank robbery begins, someone calls the police somewhat belatedly. A police car is dispatched. Long before it gets there, the robbers start a suicidal amok run. Around that time, another bank on the same street is reported as being robbed. There is confusion if it's the same or a different bank. Anyway, police car continues driving there, but comes too late, another amok shooting occurs.
The second police car is dispatched, and all over town, policemen start getting ready to man more police cars as word preads that something bigger is going on. But where to send the two police cars we have on dispatch already? A third bank is reported, a fourth, even a fifth.
Where to send police when it is spread so thinly and we have so many banks in town?

extra detail, the first bank robbery location is known. The second is simply a report of robbers in a car heading towards the same area of town the first one occured at, then there is a report that a second bank accross the street from the first is being robbed but is it, or is this the first one being reported again with an erroneous address?
Then a third robber car and a fourth are also called in but its not certain where these are or what part of town they are headed for until they are almost there.