Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Disturbance diverts London-D.C. flight

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Sluggo_63 said:
No they didn't. They wanted to know if they were authorized to shoot down the airliners, they weren't asking permission to. Big difference.

Yea, permission starts with a p.
 
FN FAL said:
Yea, permission starts with a p.
Yeah, we salivate at the thought of getting to shoot down an airliner full of Americans over our own soil.:rolleyes: Jackass.

PS-my avatar was designed for tools like you.
 
Yes, you might be right about 60 year old women being distractions. I never really thought of that way. I apologize for making some of the remarks I did towards you. I was out of line.....enough said.
 
Slice121 said:
Yeah, we salivate at the thought of getting to shoot down an airliner full of Americans over our own soil.:rolleyes: Jackass.

PS-my avatar was designed for tools like you.
I notice the 9/11 NORAD tapes made a great effort to indicate that even though two fighter planes were "un-armed" that day, they ordered them into the "fray" anyway.

I guess the plan was to "nudge" the errant airliners into "voluntary compliance".

Also interesting to note, the whole country was being guarded by 14 fighter jets. I know that Warren v. The District of Columbia proves that the government does not protect us as individuals, but only 14 jet fighters watching the store? hahahaha...kick my ass with your avatar, but I think the cheese is stinky and it ain't be my fault.
 
Oh me Gosh. . .me first drunk post. . .what are we talking about. . .oh yeah. . .the United flight. . .I saw it. . .when I landed there. . .lots of news helicopters. . . big plane on the runway. . .wouldn't you want to pull it over asap IF SOMEONE WANTED TO TAKE IT OVER!!
 
FN FAL said:
Go back and read the 9/11 NORAD transcripts.

Fighter jocks wanted permission to shoot down a mis-identified airliner. All ticked off and no place to go; fortunately for the people on that airliner, the permission was denied.

But they didn't. Did they say they were ticked off? Did you talk to them? I did, no they were not ticked, no they did not press to fire, they were already told to expect it, and were clarifying what they hoped would be correct, no permission. Get your facts straight idiot.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom