BBC c Files - Only Part 1, only the timeline - the Video

[ma2007]

Now on youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR3aNMLkahc

They say in the last minute:
7:40 AAL11 left the gate
57 minutes later FAA informed NORAD
9 minutes to scramble interceprors

this gives: 7:40, 8:27 and 8:36
so more or less the OCT.

But they do NOT account for:
1. the surrealistic time between 8:13 (time of the signs of hijacking) and the late notification of the military. Imagine an ATC calling AAL11 for a quarter of an hour "where are you"? "Why don`t you answer?" "Hello!" "Don`t drive drunk and in the wrong way!" "Helllllllloooooho!"-
14 minutes like that. It is bullshit, they do not argue about that.

2. Allegedly there was a confusion with an exercise going on ? In a splut of a second even according to the video it is cleared: no ecercise, real world. The exercise cannot be an excuse, not at all, never.

3. 9 minutes to give the order to scramble ? No explanation for that. After it is clear ()"real world") it takes one hit on the button. Why should anybody in the NEADS should care for nothing else than the chief of the fire brigade who says: "do your job, the alarm is red now".

4. Allegedly the pilots do not know where they should go at thattime. But this causes no problem: they have radio, the AAL11 is on the RADAR of the ATCs, and the pilots have radar themselves.

5. The time between order to scramble and (alleged)start (8:52) is not mentioned in this part. No problem. It is the normal period of time internationally for QRA (Quick reaction alert). The only problem is: at 8:52 no intercepror left OTIS. There is no witness for that - but there are witnesses for
a) no scrambling at that time and b) no arrival in due time in New York.

The BBC documentary is primitive, bad, no new "information" and does not argue about the important issues.

Just saw part two which only adds to this issue that the pilots went seawards because they were used to do so. One laugh more. Imaagine a fire brigade, a police unit, a clinic emrgency transport acting that way. Again: they have radio to get informed where the plane is which should be intercepted.
Yes and it were a lot of planes in the airspace. Divide the number by ARTCCs and by ATCs in charge: a normal amount to get clear.

[The Lone Groover]

1. Good grief!!!

..surely someone got fired over this?

[salvorhardin]

2. The BBC documentary clearly argues for a conspiracy after-the-fact

You'll have to watch the whole hour in order to grasp the argument made by the programs producers and writers though.

I know that's not what you wanted them to say, but it is what they said and whether or not it presents new information to you is not the case. It presented what will be new information to the majority of its' target audience -- the interested but not obsessed U.K. citizenry.

[The Lone Groover]

3. Well...

"The BBC documentary clearly argues for a conspiracy after-the-fact"

Did it exhaustively examine the claims of foreknowledge of the attacks by the Bush Admin?

A fair and balanced program would obviously do that because that is a major 9/11 "CT" issue.

[ma2007]

4. To argue for a conspiracy is really not so hard to do -

as long as we do not claim that the "landing" of the four planes was a traffic accident. It was a conspiracy taking place - but of whom ? And: do we need theories to clear it ?

We do not need hints on a conspiracy in the BBC movie. I am not willing to look at the wjole rubbish to gat out what absurdities the BBC produces. Here in this thread I state that the alleged times named in the first parts are not researched, not logic and just put together in the normal mainstream OCT way.

Whoever wants to discuss a theory made up by the BBC itself may open a thread to discuss it.

[ma2007]

5. About the claim that OTIS scambled

two intercepro jets:

medienanalyse-international.de/hunt.html

Not at 8:52. Only more than one hour later.

It is a lie in the lie to say they did not find the way. They never scrambled.

[CJCRANE]

6. The documentary is a blatant hit-piece.

To anyone who has watched "9/11: Press for Truth" or is aware of similar information this documentary comes across as an emotionally manipulative hatchet job designed to keep the lid on 9/11 questions.