Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Straw Man on June 25, 2007, 09:07:49 AM
-
Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding.
more here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/prweb/20070621/bs_prweb/prweb534642_1
the plot thickens:
06/23/07
Please be advised when reviewing the article entitled "New Study From
Pilots For 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 Hit The Pentagon" the following.
These (relatively minor) points are made in the interest of historical
accuracy. Pilots for 9/11 Truth did not write it and some corrections need to
be stated. Click here for more information. Thank you.
http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/
-
It is pleasantly surprising to see Yahoo covering a story such as this. However, after watching their first documentary on the black box readout, I was unimpressed with the approach and conclusions of the Pilots for 911 truth.
A vastly more scientific documentary regarding Flight 77 can be found here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2833924626286859522&hl=en
For those of you who dismiss this counter evidence without thinking (in much the same way as you accepted it), here is another documentary with 2 Pentagon police officers who witnessed the attack. Here you can watch both of them give detailed eye witness accounts which blatantly contradict the "official" flight path:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4196580169348087802&hl=en
-
that pentacon video was interesting. the final 20 minutes is good
-
Anyone see the Utah UFO media coverage? Apparently a plane full of passengers saw 2 UFOs and the captain of the plane went on Glen Beck's show, and talked about it.
-
glenn beck and nancy grace should both be thrown in a pit
-
glenn beck and nancy grace should both be thrown in a pit
AHAHAHAHAHHA That cracked me up. ;D Thank you!
(http://devan1.tripod.com/Pics/OVER_PIT.JPG)
-
that pentacon video was interesting. the final 20 minutes is good
I agree, but there is a paradox:
1) Both officers are positive the flight path is north of the gas station and Naval Annex, in accordance with the NTSB findings (and directly refuting The 911 Commission's path)
2) Both officers are positive the plane hit the Pentagon
The problem is, whatever hit the Pentagon had to have been on The 911 Commission flight path trajectory based on the downed light poles outside as well as the internal damage sustained to the columns and the A, B, and C ring walls of the Pentagon.
The internal damage
(http://www.911-strike.com/spools.jpg)
The conflicting flight paths (The 911 Commission path is in purple, the NTSB and Pentagon Police Eye witness path is in green)
(http://www.911-strike.com/flight_path.jpg)
(Media taken from http://www.911-strike.com/quantum-path.htm)
Comments?
-
glenn beck and nancy grace should both be thrown in a pit
I don't know enough about Glenn Beck to agree but you're dead on about Nancy DisGrace.
-
Anyone see the Utah UFO media coverage? Apparently a plane full of passengers saw 2 UFOs and the captain of the plane went on Glen Beck's show, and talked about it.
You realize what is in Utah that could involve something that could be mistaken as a UFO don't you? A little place called Dugway proving grounds, not to mention the Utah test and training range, better known to CTers as "area 52"
-
I don't get where anyone can suppose or think that a missile was used to hit the pentagon.
Why do it? 2 towers were enough to change the world.
What do you do with the plane and the passengers?
How many people would have to be involved across how many agencies and departments including Airport employees, Airline employees, families, air traffic controllers, etc... that you'd have to keep silent?
-
I don't get where anyone can suppose or think that a missile was used to hit the pentagon.
Why do it? 2 towers were enough to change the world.
What do you do with the plane and the passengers?
How many people would have to be involved across how many agencies and departments including Airport employees, Airline employees, families, air traffic controllers, etc... that you'd have to keep silent?
This is the dumbest conspiracy theory I've ever heard of.
-
I don't get where anyone can suppose or think that a missile was used to hit the pentagon.
Why do it? 2 towers were enough to change the world.
What do you do with the plane and the passengers?
How many people would have to be involved across how many agencies and departments including Airport employees, Airline employees, families, air traffic controllers, etc... that you'd have to keep silent?
Apparently 2 towers were not enough to change the world, hence 4 simultaneously hijacked airliners.
Do you know what part of the Pentagon was struck?
Do you know what Rumsfeld announced the day before?
Do you know who died in the Pentagon?
If you bothered to do some research instead of making mindless assumptions about the necessary conspirators you would have some possible answers.
Why not contribute something of substance and address the issues raised regarding the NTSB and The 911 Commission flight path discrepancies?
-
Apparently 2 towers were not enough to change the world, hence 4 simultaneously hijacked airliners.
Do you know what part of the Pentagon was struck?
Do you know what Rumsfeld announced the day before?
Do you know who died in the Pentagon?
If you bothered to do some research instead of making mindless assumptions about the necessary conspirators you would have some possible answers.
Why not contribute something of substance and address the issues raised regarding the NTSB and The 911 Commission flight path discrepancies?
And i was starting to think you were actually smart.........
Apparently 2 towers weren't enough? You don;t know that because it wasn't only 2 towers. But I'm sure most would agree that 2 towers would have still caused all the changes we see today.
Yes to all your questions, I have done extensive research in the pentagon part of 9/11 and have had many long detailed discussions with 240 on the subject.
The questions I asked are only part of many questions and facts that make the idea of a missile hitting the pentagon ridiculous(if that is what you are getting at....or is it holograms? ::)).
But take comfort in the fact that many people like your self who think they are intelligent are moonbots in spite of it all. :)
-
The people that were on the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon are living on the island of the tv show 'Lost'
They are the OTHERS. I thought everyone knew that.
-
The people that were on the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon are living on the island of the tv show 'Lost'
They are the OTHERS. I thought everyone knew that.
lol. :D
-
The people that were on the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon are living on the island of the tv show 'Lost'
They are the OTHERS. I thought everyone knew that.
No one opened the "intellectual think tank" in Wonderland and told seauantea that i guess. :)
-
No one opened the "intellectual think tank" in Wonderland and told seauantea that i guess. :)
ouch! lol :D
-
And i was starting to think you were actually smart.........
Apparently 2 towers weren't enough? You don;t know that because it wasn't only 2 towers. But I'm sure most would agree that 2 towers would have still caused all the changes we see today.
You implied that if the government were behind 911 "2 towers" would have been enough; I threw your logic back in your face by pointing out it wasn’t even enough for ‘19 Muslims with box-cutters’.
One tower could have been enough.
One plane could have been enough.
One thoughtless moderator could have been enough.
The point: Keep your speculation about what is and is not enough to yourself because there is no way to substantiate it and it contradicts both the official 911 conspiracy theory and the many alternate ones.
Yes to all your questions, I have done extensive research in the pentagon part of 9/11 and have had many long detailed discussions with 240 on the subject.
The questions I asked are only part of many questions and facts that make the idea of a missile hitting the pentagon ridiculous(if that is what you are getting at....or is it holograms? ::)).
But take comfort in the fact that many people like your self who think they are intelligent are moonbots in spite of it all. :)
If you had done your research you would not be asking for reasons to strike the Pentagon; the announcement on Sep 10th regarding 2.3 trillion in lost transactions in conjunction with the dozens of accounting staff killed at the Pentagon on 911 provide a plausible motive. Instead you should be focusing what little brainpower you possess on conjuring an explanation for the aforementioned flight path discrepancies between the 911 Commission and NTSB.
I am not holding my breath :)
-
You implied that if the government were behind 911 "2 towers" would have been enough; I threw your logic back in your face by pointing out it wasn’t even enough for ‘19 Muslims with box-cutters’.
One tower could have been enough.
One plane could have been enough.
One thoughtless moderator could have been enough.
The point: Keep your speculation about what is and is not enough to yourself because there is no way to substantiate it and it contradicts both the official 911 conspiracy theory and the many alternate ones.
And same goes for your speculation:
Apparently 2 towers were not enough to change the world, hence 4 simultaneously hijacked airliners.
Perhaps you can get smart enough to follow your own advice.... but then jackasses like your self live as legends in their own mind. ::)
If you had done your research you would not be asking for reasons to strike the Pentagon; the announcement on Sep 10th regarding 2.3 trillion in lost transactions in conjunction with the dozens of accounting staff killed at the Pentagon on 911 provide a plausible motive. Instead you should be focusing what little brainpower you possess on conjuring an explanation for the aforementioned flight path discrepancies between the 911 Commission and NTSB.
Motive doesn't by itself prove anything. But to a moon-bot, you probably think Humpty Dumpty was pushed off the wall.
Your comments have proven yourself to be a real assumptive idiot. ;)
Perhaps in your self induced delusions of brilliance you can answer some of the questions i asked about the passengers and plane.
Or just spit out more intellectual snobbery...hahahahaha
-
WARNING:
This premises contains testosterone, ...a substance known to be harmful to polite discussion.
Testosterone thwarts diplomacy, ...and can lead to much arrogant chest thumping.
Debilitating effects of testosterone poisoning are ad hominem attacks on others, coupled with delusional states of
thinking you are coming off as a real tough badass, when in reality you just look like a jerk.
If you are suffering from testosterone poisoning, ...please back away from the keyboard... slowly. ;D
-
WARNING:
This premises contains testosterone, ...a substance known to be harmful to polite discussion.
Testosterone thwarts diplomacy, ...and can lead to much arrogant chest thumping.
Debilitating effects of testerone poisoning are ad hominem attacks on others, coupled with delusional states of
thinking you are coming off as a real tough badass, when in reality you just look like a jerk.
If you are suffering from testosterone poisoning, ...please back away from the keyboard... slowly. ;D
Is that worse than dealing with a woman on the rag . . . or in your case menopause?
:D
-
Is that worse than dealing with a woman on the rag . . . or in your case menopause?
:D
:o Nothing could possibly be worse than dealing with a woman on the rag!
ps - I wish I were menopausal, ...but no such luck. I'll sadly be riding the crimson wave for many years to come. :'(
-
Is there such a thing a Nag war? ;D
-
:o Nothing could possibly be worse than dealing with a woman on the rag!
WRONG! Try dealing with multiple females on the rag. :'(
-
Is there such a thing a Nag war? ;D
Yes there is! ...and I've declared it on you until you let me beat you at poker! {pout} :'(
-
WRONG! Try dealing with multiple females on the rag. :'(
:o :o :o :o
You win! I stand corrected. Tis a fate I'd wish for... only upon those who really tick me off ...maybe. ;)
-
WARNING:
This premises contains testosterone, ...a substance known to be harmful to polite discussion.
Testosterone thwarts diplomacy, ...and can lead to much arrogant chest thumping.
Debilitating effects of testosterone poisoning are ad hominem attacks on others, coupled with delusional states of
thinking you are coming off as a real tough badass, when in reality you just look like a jerk.
If you are suffering from testosterone poisoning, ...please back away from the keyboard... slowly. ;D
Estrogen destroys the part of the brain responsible for logic.
-
This is the dumbest conspiracy theory I've ever heard of.
Agreed.
-
Estrogen destroys the part of the brain responsible for logic.
{LOL} Now that was a witty & funny comeback.
Who are you, ...and what did you do with Brixton? ...on second thought... never mind... you might send him back. :-*
ps - May your house be filled with ten dozen menstruating females. :D
-
{LOL} Now that was a witty & funny comeback.
Who are you, ...and what did you do with Brixton? ...on second thought... never mind... you might send him back. :-*
ps - May your house be filled with ten dozen menstruating females. :D
Being witty isn't a requirement as long as you're right.
May you be pinned underneath one large menstruating female.
-
Being witty isn't a requirement as long as you're right.
May you be pinned underneath one large menstruating female.
You just want to get me in bed dontcha? ;)
-
I agree, but there is a paradox:
1) Both officers are positive the flight path is north of the gas station and Naval Annex, in accordance with the NTSB findings (and directly refuting The 911 Commission's path)
2) Both officers are positive the plane hit the Pentagon
The problem is, whatever hit the Pentagon had to have been on The 911 Commission flight path trajectory based on the downed light poles outside as well as the internal damage sustained to the columns and the A, B, and C ring walls of the Pentagon.
What about all the engine and plane parts that were around the building. You insult your own intelligence and the lives of the people lost when you venture to believe in this crap..
-
What about all the engine and plane parts that were around the building. You insult your own intelligence and the lives of the people lost when you venture to believe in this crap..
Word.
-
Word.
Yaeh, didn't a turbine end up by a gas station?
-
Anyone see the Utah UFO media coverage? Apparently a plane full of passengers saw 2 UFOs and the captain of the plane went on Glen Beck's show, and talked about it.
all those people r liars..unchristian..umm what else.....oo oo o yeah..and conspiracy theorists..
-
I think the entire CT on the pentagon is rooted in the assumption the hole left in the pentagon should be shaped like a plane. When in fact reinforced concrete can withstand what pretty much amounts to and egg shell hitting it.
-
Yaeh, didn't a turbine end up by a gas station?
Not sure. Wouldn't surprise me. This entire CT is just stupid.
-
And same goes for your speculation:
Perhaps you can get smart enough to follow your own advice.... but then jackasses like your self live as legends in their own mind. ::)
Since you missed it the first time, "You implied that if the government were behind 911 "2 towers" would have been enough; I threw your logic back in your face by pointing out it wasn’t even enough for ‘19 Muslims with box-cutters’."
I was by no means making an assumption rather pointing out the idiocy of your reasoning. I promise to be less subtle in the future :)
Motive doesn't by itself prove anything.
It was you who asked why do it?.
I specifically answered, "the announcement on Sep 10th regarding 2.3 trillion in lost transactions in conjunction with the dozens of accounting staff killed at the Pentagon on 911 provide a plausible motive."
You asked for a motive and I provided one. I never said it "proved anything"; stop being an "assumptive idiot" and at the same time be sure to Google the definition of plausible because it appears you have it confused with definitive.
Your comments have proven yourself to be a real assumptive idiot. ;)
See above.
Perhaps in your self induced delusions of brilliance you can answer some of the questions i asked about the passengers and plane.
While you are Googling the definition of plausible perhaps you can Google Operation Northwoods; answer your own ancillary questions with a template drawn up by the Join Chiefs of Staff for false flag terror involving drone aircraft. However, as I alluded to in a previous post, it is essentially useless to discuss fantasy scenarios about possible ways to fabricate Flight 77 striking the Pentagon.
Conversely, it is of dire importance to discuss the glaring discrepancies with the flight paths purported by the NTSB and The 911 Commission. This should be obvious as it is evidence coming directly from the Government as opposed to your boyish wonderings. Unsurprisingly, you have neither the desire nor the capacity to address that issue.
-
Since you missed it the first time, "You implied that if the government were behind 911 "2 towers" would have been enough; I threw your logic back in your face by pointing out it wasn’t even enough for ‘19 Muslims with box-cutters’."
I was by no means making an assumption rather pointing out the idiocy of your reasoning. I promise to be less subtle in the future :)
There is no idiocy in the reasoning. 2 towers would have be enough to cuase all the changes in this country.
So what ever you meant by what you said doesn't mean jack.
It was you who asked why do it?.
I specifically answered, "the announcement on Sep 10th regarding 2.3 trillion in lost transactions in conjunction with the dozens of accounting staff killed at the Pentagon on 911 provide a plausible motive."
You asked for a motive and I provided one. I never said it "proved anything"; stop being an "assumptive idiot" and at the same time be sure to Google the definition of plausible because it appears you have it confused with definitive.
Yes, it is a plausible motive but it is based on circumstances and doesn't prove crap.
Is this the basis for your assertion? What is you assertion anyway? Are saying it wasn't airplane that hit the pentagon?
(odds are you won't even answer this question but instead do more gay-ass side stepping laced with ad-hom)
While you are Googling the definition of plausible perhaps you can Google Operation Northwoods; answer your own ancillary questions with a template drawn up by the Join Chiefs of Staff for false flag terror involving drone aircraft. However, as I alluded to in a previous post, it is essentially useless to discuss fantasy scenarios about possible ways to fabricate Flight 77 striking the Pentagon.
Conversely, it is of dire importance to discuss the glaring discrepancies with the flight paths purported by the NTSB and The 911 Commission. This should be obvious as it is evidence coming directly from the Government as opposed to your boyish wonderings. Unsurprisingly, you have neither the desire nor the capacity to address that issue.
Discrepancies in reports involving complex events are nothing new. It doesn't proves anything.
Can you have discussion with out being an ass and debate the points?
Probably not. So don't bother as you have neither anything substantial to say other than ad-hom and link posting/quoting
-
There is no idiocy in the reasoning. 2 towers would have be enough to cuase all the changes in this country.
So what ever you meant by what you said doesn't mean jack.
Again:
“You implied that if the government were behind 911 "2 towers" would have been enough; I threw your logic back in your face by pointing out it wasn’t even enough for ‘19 Muslims with box-cutters’.
One tower could have been enough.
One plane could have been enough.
One thoughtless moderator could have been enough.
The point: Keep your speculation about what is and is not enough to yourself because there is no way to substantiate it and it contradicts both the official 911 conspiracy theory and the many alternate ones.”
Yes, it is a plausible motive but it is based on circumstances and doesn't prove crap.
Is this the basis for your assertion? What is you assertion anyway? Are saying it wasn't airplane that hit the pentagon?
(odds are you won't even answer this question but instead do more gay-ass side stepping laced with ad-hom)
Discrepancies in reports involving complex events are nothing new. It doesn't proves anything.
Can you have discussion with out being an ass and debate the points?
Probably not. So don't bother as you have neither anything substantial to say other than ad-hom and link posting/quoting
Apparently you make a concentrated effort to contradict yourself with every post to achieve new depths of stupidity.
You accuse me of “gay-ass side stepping laced with ad-hom”, yet you brush aside the most concrete official evidence from that day.
You ask for a motive, yet when furnished with one you resort to the sheer idiocy of labelling a motive “circumstantial” and the shining brilliance of “doesn’t prove crap”.
Care to explain how a motive could be anything other than circumstantial?
Do you understand the meaning of motive?
Do you understand the meaning of circumstantial?
Do you understand the problem with the NTSB flight data recorder readout being materially off from the angle of impact and downed light poles?
Do you understand the problem with 2 Pentagon police officers corroborating each other’s eyewitness testimony and the above noted NTSB readout?
Unlike you, I am not interested in rectal speculation and I therefore will not waste time guessing what struck the Pentagon. Instead, like any responsible investigator, I am concentrating on the available evidence. “It doesn’t proves anything” is not a satisfactory response, rather the ostrich reaction of a fool who fails to grasp the significance of the situation. The data readout is just that, a readout: the FBI provided the NTSB with what was supposed to be the black box from Flight 77; the NTSB plugged this data into a program to render the flight path. There was no interpretation involved.
With this in mind, explain to the board how the trajectory of this NTSB flight path could be so far off from The 911 Commission flight path as to render physically impossible the downing of the five light poles outside the Pentagon as well as the internal column damage.
Furthermore, explain how the altitude readout does not conform to the possibility of whatever aircraft the black box was extracted from having struck the Pentagon after considering the known manoeuvrability of a commercial airliner and the pitch of the object in the publicized Pentagon security footage.
-
Ok so what you saying is that there are discrepancies in the reports and that's all?
Well good for you.
I agree there are discrepancies in the reports.
Is there anything else you would like add? Perhaps something with substance since you won't "speculate" ::)?
-
Discussion about the shape of the impact hole, the origin of the debris recovered from the sight or the identity of the object appearing in the Pentagon security camera footage is by nature speculative and consequently useless. However, it is not speculation to conclude unequivocally that the black box given to the NTSB by the FBI is not from the aircraft that struck the Pentagon; the readout plots an exact path which is incompatible with the well documented internal and external damage.
At this point, feel free to speculate as to how and why this happened.
-
Discussion about the shape of the impact hole, the origin of the debris recovered from the sight or the identity of the object appearing in the Pentagon security camera footage is by nature speculative and consequently useless. However, it is not speculation to conclude unequivocally that the black box given to the NTSB by the FBI is not from the aircraft that struck the Pentagon; the readout plots an exact path which is incompatible with the well documented internal and external damage.
At this point, feel free to speculate as to how and why this happened.
What are some or all of the possible reasons for the black box given by the FBI to the NTSB to be incompatible with the well documented internal and external damage?