I have a thought provoking question for you...

recon 16 said:
I was recently watching a Discovery Channel special: Flight 93: The Flight That Fought Back when they were recreating (with actors) when the terrorists took over the cockpit of Flight 93, the narrarator (Kiefer Sutherland says: "The highjackers quickly, either kill or incapacitate Captain Jason Dahl and First Officer Leroy Homer" That fact that they did not know is completely understandable, because all we have is voice recordings. But what made me think is, we have satalites in the sky that are cable of transmitting HUMUNGUS amounts of data, we have cameras that are small enough to be placed into cigarette lighters (ive seen a private investigator use one), most new planes have some sort of satalite uplink, people all over the world have webcams set up (that shows you how easy it is),

Why don't planes have cameras (even low quality) in the cockpit, or even thru out the plane?

With todays technology it would be so possible, heck I'm sitting in a hammock hanging of my backporch righting this, with no wires attached to my computer. This just consumer equipment, big industries have satalite uplinks that could transmit this data. Even it that is not possible we now have drives that size of my thumb that can hold upwards of 32gb (and in the near future 64gb or so ive heard) which can be transformed easily to hold data from a "pin-hole" camera, much like the blackboxes (primitive IMO).

Though it may not prevent that actual attacks (obviously) if installed on September 11, it have alot of today's unanswered questions, answered. Dont you think? Please comment!

instead of talking politics lets talk technology... please stay on topic^^^
 
i think the reason people think that the govt couldnt have done it is because they so blindly believe that all people are good at heart. you have to realize, anyone that wants to be in power, shouldnt be(in power). it may seem that the govt is looking out for you, but that is not the case. its just in their best interest to be nice. not everyone is kind hearted and compassionate, and there are more than a few people who would kill for power. there are even people who would sacrifice their lives and the lives of close ones for power! never underestimate what lengths people are willing to go to to get power.
 
mark thorpe said:
trust me if this was true i woulda heard about it at work, we discuss alot of crashes there, and this has never come up. its is BS. period. when you have some SOLID proof, then post it. but at the moment it is 100% opinion, nothing more.

With all due respect, how do you know what we were told by the media is 100% proof? Most of the reports and statements about that day were released by the US government, so is it not somewhat possible that if they were in on the whole thing they told the media what they wanted the people to believe?

I watched that Loose Change video, and despite a few things in it being somewhat questionable in its credibility, it does make you think. I'm not 100% saying good old George Bush was behind it and I'm not 100% saying terrorist minions did it, but surely no-one can deny that there are a few holes in the US Governments side of the story.
 
I agree, there are holes with the governments side, but that loose change thing is only from one source. They probably massaged the data somewhat too.
 
lol yeah sorry bout that... this is getting really old, and just getting boring now..

anyway, back to the cameras thing:

mark thorpe said:
about the cameras... expense. its an added expense for the airlines, and one that is un needed. i work on aircraft, and its all about reducing costs while still having good safety. having cameras in the cockpit will push up the costs alot, they aint cheap... thats what the voice recorder and black box is for... to record data from the aircraft.
 
Back
Top Bottom