The state of the 9/11 truth movement

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

With the 10 anniversary of 9/11 around the corner and with the expected ramp up of propaganda masquerading under the guise of honest and unbiased investigations, I thought I would put down where I stand regarding various aspects of 9/11.

First of all, the 9/11 truth movement has made some great progress in the first 5-7 years after 9/11. Unfortunately, for the last few years, the movement has slowly changed and it has become closed minded, stuck in a rut and is fast stagnating. The movement seems to be mostly concentrating their efforts on the fall of the 3 towers on 9/11. This is a foolish thing to do as they are putting all their eggs in one basket at the expense of other areas of investigation.

The so called 9/11 truth movement is quickly becoming the 9/11 Controlled Demolition movement.

But even within the area of how the towers collapsed any new evidence on this subject is met with apathy by many of the movement’s leaders. They are unwilling, or worse, too hostile to consider it.

Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth whose organisation has over 1500 Architects and Engineers and is based around the idea that the towers fell because of a controlled demolition, has yet to address a recent new theory for the collapse.

The best and most scientific theory I have seen is called ROOSD which means "Runaway Open Office Space Destruction". Details HERE... http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=245&MMN_position=482:482

It's a difficult theory to fully explain with few words, but what it comes down to, is that the perimeter of the WTC buildings acted as a "funnel" containing a downward moving avalanche of rubble, which advanced faster inside the building than the perimeter failed on the outside. The perimeter "peeled off" in a banana like fashion after the crush front had passed. Thus, most of what happened was obscured from view.

The "puffs" that appear way ahead of the blast wave may not be explosions as Richard Gage and others claim but the result of debris/machinery falling through empty lift shafts ahead of the blast wave which displaces the air, forcing it out and giving the illusion of "puffs" ejecting from the building.

However, explosives were probably still used to initiate the demolition as the initiation has so far defied OBSERVABLE scientific explanation and it is highly unlikely the initiation was caused by the plane strikes or the ensuing fires unless terrorists had control of physics on 9/11.

Explosives need not be used all the way down the building sequentially as A&E for 9/11 truth suggest. Studying the OBSERVABLE data for this, it is revealed that the actions of the building collapse can be explained easily using this OBSERVABLE data without resorting to exotic theories.

THIS site is the best place to start when using OBSERVATIONAL data: http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911/index.php?module=pagemaster&PAGE_user_op=view_page&PAGE_id=197&MMN_position=384:384

ROOSD accounts for the symmetrical peeling of the building and the dustification of the building but does not account for the collapse initiation nor the core column destruction.

The problem with A&E for 9/11 Truth is that although they use logic to reach their conclusions, their conclusions are based on false data rather than OBSERVATIONS. This means that even though they have used a logical path to reach their conclusions, their conclusions may be wrong because their logic is a false logic being based on false arguments. They have ASSUMED that "if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck... then it is a duck."

Yes, it looks like a controlled demolition but is it really?

I think it is, but not in the way Gage describes.

I think Gage has not looked into ROOSD in any depth (its a fairly new theory) or is just not yet aware of it. I don't think Gage has ignored this on purpose but he really needs to address this new theory if he wants to remain relevant and keep up with the game. It would disappoint me if he did not do this as I consider him to be a brave man with a great deal of integrity.

ROOSD does not exclude an engineered kick off to the global destruction. Why the resistance by so many to the concept? ROOSD simply explains the part we CAN and DO see. It explains virtually all the observations of the towers coming down.

Gage needs to embrace and study ROOSD. He has the ear of the 9/11 movement. For a group like AE911T which represents 15,000 petition signers with 1,500 licensed professionals, its vital Gage is honest. If aspects of his ideas are wrong (as I think they are) he needs to admit this. There is no shame in this. He is just refining and revising his theory. Being wrong can be a great thing as it elevates one to a new level of understanding.

However, I beilve Gage IS correct about the collapse of World Trade Centre 7. He should be commended for this.

Much of the truth movement resists any attempts to remove the MASSIVE COMPLEX of a very high tech intervention which caused the total destruction of the towers. ROOSD is way too much like a natural phenomena (it is!) even though it does not rule out that the initiation is probably engineered.

Is the so called truth movement actually interested in the truth?

ROOSD is the best explanation regarding the collapse of the towers. Better than NIST. Better than Popular Mechanics. Better than any current “truth movement” theory.

The ROOSD idea and the A&E for 9/11 Truth theories need to be fused together. Then I think we will have the best explantion for the fall of the towers.

This brings me onto the related subject of the high tech explosive Nano-Thermite being found in paint chips from the dust. Steven Jones and Niles Harriet submitted their experiments and their results to be published in a specialist peer-reviewed journal.
Its getting on for 3 years now and nobody has scientifically debunked their findings. Instead debunkers attacked the journal itself claiming that it was a “vanity publication” and that anyone can publish papers for it. If its so easy to publish papers, then why don't the objectors write up their objections and get them peer-reviewed and published?
Why have the most vocal debunkers not asked for Dust to test?

The bottom line is that the science still stands.

However, the results have yet to be reproduced or confirmed. There have been 3 other attempts to reproduce the original papers results. Two of the attempts did not even progress past the experimenters receiving the dust as their mail was tapered with and the dust had gone from the package.
The third attempt confirmed the chemical make up of the paint chips but they could not be ignited like the original paint chips. This could be because Nano-Thermite degrades over time. More experiments need to be done.
Interestingly, there was another request for experiments to be done on the dust. It transpired that the person wanting the dust (via a proxy) worked for NIST but was not forthcoming about it. He could have easily acquired his own samples from the NIST archive. Not only that, he also posed as an independent reporter at a NIST press conference and wasted time by asking pointless questions so other reports could not ask their own questions. Fascinating details of the detective work that went into uncovering all this can be found HERE: http://911blogger.com/news/2010-05-31/dusting-corley-official-response-discovery-energetic-materials-wtc-dust?page=1

I think Nano-Thermite probably was present because not only do we have the peer-reviewed paper and explosive paint samples, we also have evidence of its destructive force that was left behind after the collapse.
FEMA reported a one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness and its edges, which were curled like a paper scroll, had been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes, some larger than a silver dollar, let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes. Nano-Thermite would explain this. It would also explain the presence of molten steel found in the towers which was widely reported. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cg

Nano-Thermite would also explain the Iron Rich Micro-spheres found by the USGC. Only temperatures reached by an explosive like Nano-Thermite could explain these spheres and the molten steel. Not even fires powered by aircraft fuel gets anywhere near hot enough to cause this effect. It would also explain how the cores collapsed straight through themselves:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bj_gqdi1oI

It would also explain the molten steel pouring from the building before its collapse that Gage and others highlight that may have something to do with the collapse initiation.

I don't want to go any deeper into the technical aspects of the collapses as the main thrust of this was to point out how I feel about the movement as a whole. What I will say is that if one does wish to concentrate on the buildings of 911, WTC7 is the smoking gun.

I wrote earlier that the 9/11 truth movement is NOT the controlled demolition movement.
There are hundreds of other problems with the official story. Here are 50 of them. None are to do with the buildings.
http://911truthnews.com/the-facts-speak-for-themselves/

These all need to be followed up but unfortunately, the majority of the truth movement is letting itself down by ignoring these questions.

Nanothermite, natural collpase of the twin towers, misdirection at the highest levels and hijackers can coexist. Not only logically, but that is what the evidence demands. It's about what you see in the evidence, both in CD research and in "hijackers and the FBI/CIA" research.
I reject the rejection of one in favor of the other, because of the stubborn misconception that they are mutually exclusive. In order for this movement to make progress, this realization ought to find its way into the collective activist consciousness.

Its time to evolve as the great Bill Hicks once said.

With regards to the propaganda that is no doubt on the way, I would recommend reading this list below that points out the difference between a psudoskeptic and a true skeptics.

Characteristics of a Pseudoskeptic:

1. The tendency to deny, rather than doubt.
2. Double standards in the application of criticism.
3. The making of judgments without full inquiry.
4. Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate.
5. Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks in lieu of arguments.
6. Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudoscientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.
7. Presenting insufficient evidence or proof.
8. Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof.
9. Making unsubstantiated counter-claims.
10. Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence.
11. Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it.
12. Use of vague, exaggerated or untestable claims.
13. Asserting that claims which have not been proven false must be true, and vice versa (Argument from ignorance).
14. They speak down to their audience using 'arguments from authority'.
15. They put forward their assumptions as if they were universal truths.
16. No references to reputable journal material.
17. If the pseudo-skeptic has a monetary interest (such as maintaining a funding stream or a salary) his criticisms often become vituperative.

Characteristics of a True Skeptics / Open-Minded Skeptics:

A. Does not show any of the characteristics of a pseudoskeptic
B. Inquires and asks questions to try to understand things
C. Applies open inquiry and investigation of both sides
D. Is nonjudgmental, doesn't jump to rash conclusions
E. Has honest doubt and questions all beliefs, including their own
F. Seeks the truth, considers it the highest aim
G. Fairly and objectively weighs evidence on all sides
H. Acknowledges valid convincing evidence
I. Possesses solid sharp common sense and reason
J. Is able to adapt and update their paradigms to new evidence

Finally, I will say that if the 9/11 Commission themselves do not believe the official story, why do you?
http://www.911summary.com/

[Darla Ken Pearce]

The pieces are all out there in one form or another, it's a matter of joining in some unity of thought and requires ~ no infighting among ourselves. It's no wonder all this could be kept silent, as many work to disprove rather than prove and argue without understanding all the many other elements regarding who, what, where and how.

By this, I mean names and who was at the controls like Cheney and Rumsfeld ~ all the players ~ what military were involved. Who exactly ordered the stand down of fighter jets? We know so much but nothing has been done about it. Bush, Sr. and Bush, Jr. ran off with the gold. Many others benefited but none have been called to account for their actions.

Put those threads together and the rest will unravel on it's own. Fighting, disproving, and working at cross purposes does not help any of us to find the truth of 911 in all it's ugly glory. A huge black decade that ends this year.

This year, there won't be another ridiculous anniversary without resolution of who is responsible. This year, 2011, it's time the truth be known by the anniversary date. Ten years of lies and new wars brewing is enough. It cannot be allowed to continue further. It's time has come. And so it is...

[Lifebringer]

I thought it was sulphuricthermite. Hmmm.... could have fooled me.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

A&E9/11 are about to hold a conference. As another poster on 9/11 blogger points out - this could be a huge mistake:
http://911blogger.com/news/2012-02-17/pivotal-911-petition-storms-canadian-parliament#comment-255391

In addition to this the results of new tests on WTC dust we be made public in 2 weeks.
http://digwithin.net/2012/02/17/when-mohr-is-less-the-official-non-response-to-energetic-materials-at-the-wtc/
(Please also read the comments as well)

[Dennis Leahy]

Yes, very very stupid to hitch your star to someone as controversial as Farrakhan. Really bad move.

However, in the big 3D chess game, it's all moot anyway.

The perpetrators of 911 have nothing to fear in a new investigation. Nothing at all. The contingency of a new investigation (which is what AE911Truth is pressing for) was thought-out by the perpetrators before 911. They have no fear of a new investigation.

Why? Well, they know they will never be convicted. The segment of the Global Rulers that deals with controlling the US government has done its job well. Very well. Besides owning the Congress and the White House - positions that get a minor shake-up every 2 to 4 years (with brand spanking new faces, all pre-selected by the Global Rulers political machine), the Global Rulers make sure that the federal judges and justices with "lifetime" appointments, are all working for them.

What fear would you have of wrongdoing, or of an investigation into wrongdoing, if you knew for sure that you would never be convicted?

Unless and until the underlying issue (getting ALL of the current politicians and judges out of power, and electing people with no ties to the corporations/Financial Elite/Global Rulers) is solved, there will be no justice.

Dennis

{edit} I'll leave the error, but realize I botched the idiom taken from "hitch your wagon to a star", and a better phrasing for my first sentence would have been:
Yes, very very stupid to hitch your wagon to a star as controversial as Farrakhan.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Sad but true. Still, it pains me to see A&E do this and throw away everything they have done just with one poor error of judgement.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

New Nanothemite study released. Peer review to follow.
If this is an honest study, (its funded by debunkers) then the red/grey chips may not be Nano-thermite:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=231314
It will be interesting watching this develop.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

From: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe (Stephen Jones / Niels harrit):

Quote:
Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants:

Quote:
There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=8069163&postcount=3

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants:

Quote:
SEM-EDS phase mapping (using multivariate statistical analysis) of the red layer after exposure to MEK for 55 hours did not show evidence of individual aluminum particles (Appendix G).

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=8069163&postcount=3

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe (Stephen Jones / Niels harrit):

Quote:
Red/gray chips were soaked in methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) for 55 hours with frequent agitation and subsequently dried in air over several days. The chips showed significant swelling of the red layer, but with no apparent dissolution. In marked contrast, paint chips softened and partly dissolved when similarly soaked in MEK. It was discovered in this process that a significant migration and segregation of aluminum had occurred in the red-chip material. This allowed us to assess whether some of the aluminum was in elemental form.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf


From: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe(Stephen Jones / Niels harrit):

Quote:
From the presence of elemental aluminum and iron oxide in the red material, we conclude that it contains the ingredients of thermite.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants:

Quote:
Nano-thermite (thermatic nanocomposite energetic material) has been studied in the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. A TEM image of a thin section of that material was published by R. Simpson11 in 2000 and shows material that is made up of approximately 2 nanometer iron oxide particles and approximately 30 nanometer aluminum metal spheres

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=8069163&postcount=3

From: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe(Stephen Jones / Niels harrit):

Quote:
Elemental aluminum became sufficiently concentrated to be clearly identified in the pre-ignition material.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

Dr. James Millette of MVA Scientific Consultants:

Quote:
There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles detected by PLM, SEM-EDS, or TEM-SAED-EDS, during the analyses of the red layers in their original form or after sample preparation by ashing, thin sectioning or following MEK treatment.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=8069163&postcount=3

Let the games begin

[WhiteFeather]

All you need to know listed below. EWO,,,,Please let 911 R.I.P. Already. (Cough)Building 7, excuse me.


http://www.wanttoknow.info/911/black_eagle_trust_fund

[Praxis]

I highly recommend that you read or watch anything by Judy wood. She has been the only person I have seen explain all the events from that day in a coherent and reasonable fashion. Why is all the paper left if it was a demolition and "thermite" was used? Why did the cars spontaneously combust? Why is there not 1,000,000 tons of concrete and steel lying in the foot print? Why did the towers not register the impact of the collapse on the richter scale? Why were the firefighters boots "melting" yet there were no reports of burns on any of them? Why were things glowing yet not hot(if it glows white hot then the temp would be so high that it would burn from standing next to it)? Why did the bathtub not break if the building collapsed?
Personally, I believe that this thermite and collapse focus is a red herring. Judy said it best: they knew people who not be fooled for ever; so you need a trail for those people who stop believing the official story to follow: thermite and collapse.



Seriously I can not stress this enough: Go read or watch Judy Wood Present her information. She will ask you questions that you can not answer in terms of "collapse".

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I highly recommend that you read or watch anything by Judy wood. She has been the only person I have seen explain all the events from that day in a coherent and reasonable fashion. Why is all the paper left if it was a demolition and "thermite" was used? Why did the cars spontaneously combust? Why is there not 1,000,000 tons of concrete and steel lying in the foot print? Why did the towers not register the impact of the collapse on the richter scale? Why were the firefighters boots "melting" yet there were no reports of burns on any of them? Why were things glowing yet not hot(if it glows white hot then the temp would be so high that it would burn from standing next to it)? Why did the bathtub not break if the building collapsed?
Personally, I believe that this thermite and collapse focus is a red herring. Judy said it best: they knew people who not be fooled for ever; so you need a trail for those people who stop believing the official story to follow: thermite and collapse.



Seriously I can not stress this enough: Go read or watch Judy Wood Present her information. She will ask you questions that you can not answer in terms of
"collapse".

I think you had look at my other posts regarding Judy. :frusty:

[Praxis]

Sorry I was not aware that you made that post about her. I think you need to go over your own post again if you are still using the word collapse.

[Cidersomerset]

Building seven was obviously brought down somehow by man made instigation not fire or planes, I think we can all agree with that.
Whether you go with Steven Jones or Judy Wood...
The reasons are many and a lot of documentation for pending court cases went up in smoke !!

The Twin Towers disintergrated somehow ! and all the evidence of other highrise towerblocks suggest that is impossible by office fire !!
So Judys theory seems very plausible.Although I agree she needs more support from the scientific community for it to procceed..

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

She will only receive scientific report if her science is good. How can any scientists support or endorse her work when she has done no experiments or followed the scientific method to back up her theory?

But whatever.
This thread does not need to become ANOTHER Judy thread. Its not why I started it.

[Praxis]

I do not see why you two care about what other scientists believe. Most scientists do not believe in Orgone, but if you read The Discovery of Orgone from cover to cover there is no doubt.
You should not worry about what authority tells you is correct. Most sciencetists are just as dogmatic and controlled as religion. If you do not believe this then you have not been in academia. I really enjoyed the South Park on this "Science be praised" "Our science is the best science"
Spread whatever theory you think is correct to the people you care about. When enough people do not believe official story it will collapse(lol).

This thread is about the state of 9-11 truth. Till now I did not know about Judy. Now that I do: It should be the state of 9-11 truth. I was not aware of the Bathtub. I was not aware of the cars. THE PAPER!!!!!!!! The lack of seismic activity during the "collapse." The paper!!!! Why is all that paper still there if thermite or heat brought it down? The lack of a million tons of steel and concrete.

Lets make the discussion about these things. Can the thermite advocates reconcile the things mentioned above? If so please explain and let's move the state of 9-11 awareness forward. I ask this for me and not anybody else. My mind could not reconcile her data with other theories. If your minds can, please involve me in your circle of awareness.

[Phoenix]

A&E is a psyop. You think the US government would carry out 9/11 and then not have a back up plan to suck up all the dissenters? I've spoken to those people in several phone conferences... I get a chill down my back listening to them. The leaders are part of something bigger.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

This thread is about the state of 9-11 truth. Till now I did not know about Judy. Now that I do: It should be the state of 9-11 truth. I was not aware of the Bathtub. I was not aware of the cars. THE PAPER!!!!!!!! The lack of seismic activity during the "collapse." The paper!!!! Why is all that paper still there if thermite or heat brought it down? The lack of a million tons of steel and concrete.

Lets make the discussion about these things. Can the thermite advocates reconcile the things mentioned above?


Yes. All of them have been answered. I have done so in this thread:
Post 14:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911&p=349155&viewfull=1#post349155

Post 15:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911&p=350032&viewfull=1#post350032

and subsequent posts in the same thread.

Please continue discussion on Judy Wood on the thread above. Not here.

This thread is for how the 9/11 truth movement moves forward. How will its leaders react to this new study? Will they cooperate or will that hand wave and dismiss it?
Why has A&E for 9/11 chose to associate with someone like Farrakhan? It makes all of us look bad by association. Members of A&E have left the organisation because of this one event that gage instated on speaking at.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

To clarify, I beilve that the towers were brought down with explosives.
However, we need more evidence from a science point of view.
The more evidence we have, the stronger the case.
The stronger the case, the harder it is to ignore.
The hard it is to ignore, the more chnace of a new investigation.

That is what part of my first post in this thread was about.
The rest was about examing other aspects of 9/11 such as the intel connections and so on.

[Praxis]

Your post were cute Eyes Wide Open. Enjoy your thread

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Why not stick around this thread too? You said you wanted to talk abut the 9/11 truth movement so lets talk. :)

Just as I predicted would happen, Richard Gage and Kevin Ryan speaking at this event looks like it may be the beginning of the end for the truth movement.

Its a shame.

http://www.911blogger.com/news/2012-02-29/kevin-ryan-presentation-nation-islam-911-what-really-happened-and-why

[Phoenix]

To clarify, I beilve that the towers were brought down with explosives.
However, we need more evidence from a science point of view.
The more evidence we have, the stronger the case.
The stronger the case, the harder it is to ignore.
The hard it is to ignore, the more chnace of a new investigation.

That is what part of my first post in this thread was about.
The rest was about examing other aspects of 9/11 such as the intel connections and so on.

Check this out, then prove to me it was explosives: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms1uUZX_g2I

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

To clarify, I beilve that the towers were brought down with explosives.
However, we need more evidence from a science point of view.
The more evidence we have, the stronger the case.
The stronger the case, the harder it is to ignore.
The hard it is to ignore, the more chnace of a new investigation.

That is what part of my first post in this thread was about.
The rest was about examing other aspects of 9/11 such as the intel connections and so on.

Check this out, then prove to me it was explosives: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ms1uUZX_g2I





This thread is about the state of 9-11 truth. Till now I did not know about Judy. Now that I do: It should be the state of 9-11 truth. I was not aware of the Bathtub. I was not aware of the cars. THE PAPER!!!!!!!! The lack of seismic activity during the "collapse." The paper!!!! Why is all that paper still there if thermite or heat brought it down? The lack of a million tons of steel and concrete.

Lets make the discussion about these things. Can the thermite advocates reconcile the things mentioned above?


Yes. All of them have been answered. I have done so in this thread:
Post 14:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911&p=349155&viewfull=1#post349155

Post 15:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911&p=350032&viewfull=1#post350032

and subsequent posts in the same thread.

Please continue discussion on Judy Wood on the thread above. Not here.

This thread is for how the 9/11 truth movement moves forward. How will its leaders react to this new study? Will they cooperate or will that hand wave and dismiss it?
Why has A&E for 9/11 chose to associate with someone like Farrakhan? It makes all of us look bad by association. Members of A&E have left the organisation because of this one event that gage instated on speaking at.


above from an previous post in this thread.

[iceni tribe]

the truth movement will move forward , when it stops using bogus FDR data from frank legge and warren strutt , ditches mr cold fushion denier Steven Jones and nano thermite pusher Richard Gage. IMHO

[Leon]

Just some other thoughts about the terrorists

Bin Laden was recruited by the CIA
Why not let Bin Laden organise a group of men to be in the US for their part in a attack, but perhaps giving them another story.
The CIA is using Bin Laden to co-ordinate these men to be on trips perhaps nothing to do with the attack on the twin towers at all... but perhaps sending them on a vacation so they will travel in groups on various planes.
These planes are then being taken over by the remote control plane flying near them, like show in a movie 6 months prior...
flight 93 did not behave or control was taken back from the remote vehicle and this is the real reason it was shot down... no real witnesses.
the planes hit the towers, but as we know the towers were constructed to withstand such a hit. yes these planes were bigger, but the hit did not do the damage to bring both towers down.
there is the fuel, however most of this burned outside the buildings not within them. so no real heat to damage steel.
So what else could have done this damage?
i know from friends who were in the towers six months prior that they heard heavy machinery being operated on several floors of the twin towers. with of course no access allowed to these floors.
suspicious!
A man has come forward and told us here on Avalon, that he worked on two aircraft 3 days before the twin tower attack building in remote control systems. they were told some bull***t but when they were finnished he heard that they would see the results of their work within a few days.......

So how can buildings around the world survive being burned and still stand?

But not in the US?

Is this like never buy an American car? because whenever I see an American movie and the car has an accident it always blows up???

or do things always blow up in the US? is this why it is so well accepted by most of the world?

Why have people died of radiation caused cancers after the twin towers yet no radiation seems to be detected?

How can a buildings of this size leave a hole in the ground???
most building that are destroyed leave their debris in a big heap on the ground and clear evidence of all the floors... where are the floors of the twin towers???
mmm

This is food for thought...

Then there is this building fire:
http://www.iklimnet.com/hotelfires/interstatebank.html

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Interesting point of view. Icenei, why do you think the FDR data is fake? Maybe you can start a new thread about it? :)

The truth movement has become stagnant IMO.
People need to NOT choose a theory and then stick with it no matter what.
That is intellectually dishonest.
We need to look at other ideas that have not got much exposure such as ROOSD.
We also need to focus more on the Intel connections that made 9/11 happen.
Kevin Fenton's book Disconecting the dots is amazing and should be read by any self respecting 9/11 truther.

Judy has not done experiments, Gage has not looked into ROOSD, Kevin Ryan is not responding to the new Nanothermite tests.
The 9/11 truth so called "leaders" are just sticking their fingers in their ears as they have so much of their own personality tied up with what they believe and it would crush them to be wrong.
The consideration of new ideas is the only way to move forward. Otherwise we just go in circles.

[iceni tribe]

Interesting point of view. Icenei, why do you think the FDR data is fake? Maybe you can start a new thread about it? :)


hi EWO

i think we have had this discussion before , i am no pilot or FDR expert , so when researching mr legge/strutts version of the FDR i turned to the people that are the experts in this field , and they say , to put it mildly it's the biggest pile of crock ever.

again , here is a expert

Dennis Cimino experience and qualifications:

Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR


[I]t just all comes down to two data fields being zeroed out. no tickee, no laundry. without those, there can... never be any linkage of the FDR to an 'N' number in the F.A.A. registry. not because the 'N' number is in the AC ID field, but the AC ID FIELD number is directly traceable to an N-Number in the F.A.A. registry, and the FLEET ID shows which carrier it went to.

[T]hose missing, that [data] could come from anywhere...


[N]obody flies boxes with that data zero'ed out or missing. without this data in the CPM [Crash Protected Memory], in the preamble, there can be no linkage to an aircraft N-Number.

I saw that on the first look.... the test person who extracted that data should have seen the NO ACFT ID and NO FLEET ID and said; "oh, this is such bull****" and then asked his supervisor why they were asking him to decode BULL****.

and then
Jan 20 2011, 06:54 PM
Post #2





Group: Core Member
Posts: 28
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496




first, I have a lot of stuff, as it's been a long time since I posted in the forum, about FLT-77 and the incongruencies between the N.T.S.B. *ahem* re-creation, allegedly based on the
FDR data from the aircraft registered in the F.A.A. registry as N644AA, which was an earlier model B-757 with '2' Rolls Royce RB-211 engines, and no in flight seat back phones. (per David Ray Griffin's excellent and extensive research that goes to the fact that the F.B.I. now won't substantiate any phone calls allegedly from this airplane, not even the infamous Babs Olson one., due to hard work and research done by Dr. Griffin.)

In any case, I've watched the N.T.S.B. recreation in Pandora's Black Box perhaps thousands of times in the years since Pilots For Truth put that out. Like most of the pilots in here, we don't just sit at the computer and watch Pandora's Black Box, but we do on occasion probably watch it again just for posterity sake.

And I came away with a couple things, from a 'pilot's viewpoint, that don't work for me...and I want you to hear me out and listen to me before you jump in with the typical ad-hominem attacks on me versus my information I am putting here.

First, during the approximate time of the alleged highjacking, there is no aircraft upset of even the slightest kind, not in altitude, not in pitch, not in yaw, not in roll, airspeed, or any other control parameter. Now I want you to ask yourself this question: You've just had a couple of middle eastern Saudi hijackers get into the cockpit (the FDR record shows no toggle for the door switch thru the DFDAU) and then commence to murder or wrestle with the captain and first officer. Now we know that Capt. Chuck Burlingame was far from a 98 pound boy with a nasal cannula and a walker parked behind his seat in the cockpit. I don't know what he could bench press, or what his first officer could bench press, but I have a real hard time with either of these men cooly sitting in their seats, while they are having their heads sawed off by a box cutter wielding, screaming maniac...without either hitting the yoke or kicking their rudder pedals. Because, as you might imagine, those two men are in a de-facto, bona-fide struggle for not just their lives, but their passengers lives, as well. I don't think they would have had narcolepsy in their final moments alive, in other words. The A/P would have, by design, disengaged, and at the very least, there would have been for a short period of time, an 'upset' of the aircraft, due to the disengagement of the autopilot. Anyone familiar with 'coffin corner' and what that infers, knows that any upset of this nature of any aircraft of this type, at high altitude, could lead to the incipient and sudden loss of control of the plane, if not corrected very rapidly and fast. It's not fathomable that one of the hijackers would be hovering over the A/P button on the panel to re-engage it repeatedly while they killed the crew. Un uh.

Then we get to the FL-180 'reset' that happens on the climb, for vertical separation and safety reasons. The flight crew does that, just like any flight crew who operates airplanes in the Positive Control Airspace above FL-180 is mandated to do. This happens, as you would expect it would, in the FDR record. On the descent, there is a disparity between the N.T.S.B. recreation, and the reality in the .CSV file, as the crew would have now been 'hijackers' and not experienced line pilots...and certainly would have no cognition, nor safety reasons, to do a Dulles local altimeter set as they barrelled on down to hit the Pentagon that morning. So why is it present in one N.T.S.B. product, and 'absent' in the other product, one might ask? Allegedly these things were derivatives of the other, and the data should have been in total agreement. But it's not.

Then we get to the rudder movements on this plane. And I have had discussions about this with other pilots, and they either are amputee's or they fly flat footed all day long and never use rudders ever. I think Boeing and Airbus might go the 'aercoupe' route and get rid of the rudder pedals altogether, it's about forty pounds of weight they could be garnering revenue from, and not paying fuel to haul around...because in this flight, that set of rudder pedals on AA-77, or N644AA, are mighty dead. They don't even really twitch, let alone show any pilot imputs on them. Now, granted, inexperienced pilots with zero flight experience might ignore rudders for a bit, but to do coordinated flight with the black ball in the bars indicating no skid or slip is going on, they had to use them when the A/P and rudder trim weren't taking care of it. Not the case on this plane. Matter of fact, on the final dive to the building, at 460 plus knots, nary a twitch of rudder. Hmmmm??

Between these things I cite, the control issues in pulling out of a 4,400 foot per minute dive, in an 80 ton inertial mass with wings, going downhill at great speed...and then rounding out in that dive for a lawn height, pole clipping venture and skittle across the pristine Pentagon lawn (post crash), without a pitch oscillation and loss of control in the pitch axis, known as PHUGOIDING or PORPOISING, this flight is an impossibility. It's an impossibility from any number of flight limitations standpoints, but more importantly, the hijacker would have actually had to use rudder to execute the nice 270 degree turn and stay in coordinated flight, and he would have had to do some rudder dance on the final end of the dive to stay lined up. And he did not. It's evident in the FDR recreation that this was not the case.

So in lieu of screaming at Mr. Stutts and Mr. Legge for decoding 'bull****' as I called it, which is in fact their prerogative, I do have to admonish them for believing an 80 ton airliner flown by neophytes could round out in the bottom of a very steep dive, with a lot of downward inertia, and then slide into the CATCHERS MIT like that.

and now I want to call your attention to photos taken of the Pentagon wall within the first five or so minutes of impact.

Yep, a frenchman published a piece about this utter absurdity, and had those unretouched pics in his presentation. In them, you can clearly see vertical steel studs or parts of the wall, behind the entry hole that an 80 ton, 460 knot airliner just entered.

Was this plane made out of silly putty?

No engine entry points, no wing slots, meaning wings would have been outside the building, as there was such a paucity of wreckage, for them to be converted to pure energy release at impact, the resultant force would have obliterated that quarter of the buuilding. No empennage wreckage, no engine penetration holes, no vertical stabilzer. No luggage, no bodies, no seats. No nothing.

Now, later on, there are pics of what are presumably F.B.I. guys strewing wreckage around, and in one photo, the rivet holes have obvious corrosion marks from them. Am I to believe that piece corroded in an hour or two? From what? Why is it that the moderately pristine and amost immaculate lawn, suddenly starts to sprout parts?

I can't tell you how parts sprout up except that NO F.B.I. would put their badges in their pockets while strewing wreckage you are not supposed to move, under any circumstances. They had no license to touch that stuff. It's an aircraft CRASH SITE, for christs sake. Why the badges in pockets? Why?

April Gallop mentioned she crawled thru this 'inferno hole' just after it was created, with her son on her back. She sustained no major burns. Her hair wasn't on fire. She didn't suffer significant smoke inhalation. How can this be.

How can an 80 ton aircraft vaporize it's wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, and one engine that never was recovered? How could the one engine get into the building without an entry hole?

Mr. Legge, Mr Stutts, I'm not going to scream at you for decoding and then writing this paper you wrote, but clearly, neither of you has taken the time to study this event like some of us have. There are so many 'from an experienced pilot' standpoint holes, that it doesn't compute even a little bit.

and the icing on this entire 'merde' cake, is the no ACFT ID and no FLEET ID in the FDR data preamble.

and I'll go one step further. The N.T.S.B., the F.B.I., and the F.A.A., had no constructive reason to hide from all of us, particularly Aidan Monaghan, who submitted the F.O.I.A., that just wanted these parts of this plane to be identified by serial number.

Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day. The on the spot, almost premeditatedly confiscated video tapes the F.B.I. grabbed that would show the plane, are not available fo rus to look at.

and for god's sake, why did it take the F.A.A. more than THREE YEARS to strike these involved aircraft from the F.A.A. registries?

I'll tell you why. Because these planes weren't involved. We know '2' were at the WTC, but we have no constructive proof that the plane the F.A.A. lost track of over the W. Virginia 'radar hole' where the FPS-117 long range, 3-d airsearch radar is located, by the way, is now said to have hit the Pentagon. Because without meeting certain criteria, per Robin Hordon's excellent outcry over this fact, that flight could never be positively known to be FLT-77.

Because, per Gerard Holmgren's excellent work, we know that FLT-77 wasn't even a scheduled carrier flight on Sept. 11th. 2001.

So I clearly have many many many problems with this from any number of standpoints, the most significant one is the bogus FDR data that is non-reality, which you so faithfully, painstakingly decoded the 4 seconds that the N.T.S.B. swears on a stack of bibles more or less, that it was unable to decode. Something is seriously wrong with this entire picture, and I am not accusing either of you of being putzes, but I think that you miss a whole lot of valid, very real reasons your assertions cannot stand in a reality based world of real aeronautics, real physics, and real airplane flight limits, when 'incompetent' pilots were allegedly performing these feats of magic you show in your paper. It's just not real, guys!

Dennis then loses it slightly and goes on to say.......


Mr. Stutts:

I now have to define your entire 'work product' as utter and total BULL****. You had about 4 days to come up with a better bull**** story than this one, and to propose that AC ID and FLEET ID are buried in the flight parameter stream after the preamble, where it always always always is, is so beyond the pale and absurd, that it's now not conjecture that you're a COIN OP (counterintelligence) from either the U.S. government, or the mossad, but you're actually a very badly managed one, to float this ****.

You failed to address any of the incongruencies I published about the entire event, not even one of them. Now, as a non pilot, I don't expect you to try to understand how the entire thing is absurdity from the very start to assert that an 80 ton plane went thru the 'cat door' at the Pentagon, and didn't leave any wreckage till the F.B.I. began to seed it later that morning with the Buga, Colombia jungle weathered wreckage. I can understand that, as you would have no way to explain the lack of aircraft upset during a violent and ugly hijacking, and also, the Altimeter setting in the NTSB fabricated crap in one of their products, because they were so sloppy they failed to both see it and understand it's importance here, in that this, as well as the no aircraft upset, and the lack of rudder inputs, while not on A/P., and the impossible pullout from the dive, all were so impossible that only in a child's game could any of this hokey **** be believable.

So now I have to say for the record you guys are a COIN OP for the people who did this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt to prove you were not a bull**** mill for Sunstein's cognitive infiltration network of zio prostitutes for Israel, and you totally blew that gig here.

I tell you what. Go sell this to the National Enquirer. They might print your dissertation. But no meaningful and relevant aviation based analysis validates any of your turd feed here, because virtuallly all of your stuff has borne itself out to be so absurd that even the Enquirer would probably balk at publishing your disinformation.

I'm sorry, Mr. Stutts, but you unmasked yourself with this total, utter bull**** today. And we didn't even have to do it for you, you did it yourself.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20999&st=0&start=0

mr legge
http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/imagesqtbnANd9GcSn1WAt3p48GFWTti8Un.jpg

mr stutts
http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/23264_100000034555266_3188_n.jpg

can someone please point out where the plane is , as i seem to have some inability to see planes were others can.

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagoncctvll1.gif

all i can see is a date stamp thats a day off and a subliminal message telling me plane inpact in the right hand corner.


http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/spplane.jpg


:frusty::frusty::frusty:

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Interesting point of view. Icenei, why do you think the FDR data is fake? Maybe you can start a new thread about it? :)


hi EWO

i think we have had this discussion before , i am no pilot or FDR expert , so when researching mr legge/strutts version of the FDR i turned to the people that are the experts in this field , and they say , to put it mildly it's the biggest pile of crock ever.

again , here is a expert

Dennis Cimino experience and qualifications:

Electrical Engineer
Commercial Pilot Rating, since 1981
Navy Combat Systems Specialist: RADAR, ECM, cryptographic communications
Flight Data Recorder Engineer Smiths Aerospace
BA-609, IDARS, Military and Commercial
Millimeter wave RADAR and countermeasures expert since 1973
Two patents held for Doppler RADAR ( Kavouras ):
long pulsewidth RADAR droop compensation network,
and wave guide arc detection for high powered RADAR


[I]t just all comes down to two data fields being zeroed out. no tickee, no laundry. without those, there can... never be any linkage of the FDR to an 'N' number in the F.A.A. registry. not because the 'N' number is in the AC ID field, but the AC ID FIELD number is directly traceable to an N-Number in the F.A.A. registry, and the FLEET ID shows which carrier it went to.

[T]hose missing, that [data] could come from anywhere...


[N]obody flies boxes with that data zero'ed out or missing. without this data in the CPM [Crash Protected Memory], in the preamble, there can be no linkage to an aircraft N-Number.

I saw that on the first look.... the test person who extracted that data should have seen the NO ACFT ID and NO FLEET ID and said; "oh, this is such bull****" and then asked his supervisor why they were asking him to decode BULL****.

and then
Jan 20 2011, 06:54 PM
Post #2





Group: Core Member
Posts: 28
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496




first, I have a lot of stuff, as it's been a long time since I posted in the forum, about FLT-77 and the incongruencies between the N.T.S.B. *ahem* re-creation, allegedly based on the
FDR data from the aircraft registered in the F.A.A. registry as N644AA, which was an earlier model B-757 with '2' Rolls Royce RB-211 engines, and no in flight seat back phones. (per David Ray Griffin's excellent and extensive research that goes to the fact that the F.B.I. now won't substantiate any phone calls allegedly from this airplane, not even the infamous Babs Olson one., due to hard work and research done by Dr. Griffin.)

In any case, I've watched the N.T.S.B. recreation in Pandora's Black Box perhaps thousands of times in the years since Pilots For Truth put that out. Like most of the pilots in here, we don't just sit at the computer and watch Pandora's Black Box, but we do on occasion probably watch it again just for posterity sake.

And I came away with a couple things, from a 'pilot's viewpoint, that don't work for me...and I want you to hear me out and listen to me before you jump in with the typical ad-hominem attacks on me versus my information I am putting here.

First, during the approximate time of the alleged highjacking, there is no aircraft upset of even the slightest kind, not in altitude, not in pitch, not in yaw, not in roll, airspeed, or any other control parameter. Now I want you to ask yourself this question: You've just had a couple of middle eastern Saudi hijackers get into the cockpit (the FDR record shows no toggle for the door switch thru the DFDAU) and then commence to murder or wrestle with the captain and first officer. Now we know that Capt. Chuck Burlingame was far from a 98 pound boy with a nasal cannula and a walker parked behind his seat in the cockpit. I don't know what he could bench press, or what his first officer could bench press, but I have a real hard time with either of these men cooly sitting in their seats, while they are having their heads sawed off by a box cutter wielding, screaming maniac...without either hitting the yoke or kicking their rudder pedals. Because, as you might imagine, those two men are in a de-facto, bona-fide struggle for not just their lives, but their passengers lives, as well. I don't think they would have had narcolepsy in their final moments alive, in other words. The A/P would have, by design, disengaged, and at the very least, there would have been for a short period of time, an 'upset' of the aircraft, due to the disengagement of the autopilot. Anyone familiar with 'coffin corner' and what that infers, knows that any upset of this nature of any aircraft of this type, at high altitude, could lead to the incipient and sudden loss of control of the plane, if not corrected very rapidly and fast. It's not fathomable that one of the hijackers would be hovering over the A/P button on the panel to re-engage it repeatedly while they killed the crew. Un uh.

Then we get to the FL-180 'reset' that happens on the climb, for vertical separation and safety reasons. The flight crew does that, just like any flight crew who operates airplanes in the Positive Control Airspace above FL-180 is mandated to do. This happens, as you would expect it would, in the FDR record. On the descent, there is a disparity between the N.T.S.B. recreation, and the reality in the .CSV file, as the crew would have now been 'hijackers' and not experienced line pilots...and certainly would have no cognition, nor safety reasons, to do a Dulles local altimeter set as they barrelled on down to hit the Pentagon that morning. So why is it present in one N.T.S.B. product, and 'absent' in the other product, one might ask? Allegedly these things were derivatives of the other, and the data should have been in total agreement. But it's not.

Then we get to the rudder movements on this plane. And I have had discussions about this with other pilots, and they either are amputee's or they fly flat footed all day long and never use rudders ever. I think Boeing and Airbus might go the 'aercoupe' route and get rid of the rudder pedals altogether, it's about forty pounds of weight they could be garnering revenue from, and not paying fuel to haul around...because in this flight, that set of rudder pedals on AA-77, or N644AA, are mighty dead. They don't even really twitch, let alone show any pilot imputs on them. Now, granted, inexperienced pilots with zero flight experience might ignore rudders for a bit, but to do coordinated flight with the black ball in the bars indicating no skid or slip is going on, they had to use them when the A/P and rudder trim weren't taking care of it. Not the case on this plane. Matter of fact, on the final dive to the building, at 460 plus knots, nary a twitch of rudder. Hmmmm??

Between these things I cite, the control issues in pulling out of a 4,400 foot per minute dive, in an 80 ton inertial mass with wings, going downhill at great speed...and then rounding out in that dive for a lawn height, pole clipping venture and skittle across the pristine Pentagon lawn (post crash), without a pitch oscillation and loss of control in the pitch axis, known as PHUGOIDING or PORPOISING, this flight is an impossibility. It's an impossibility from any number of flight limitations standpoints, but more importantly, the hijacker would have actually had to use rudder to execute the nice 270 degree turn and stay in coordinated flight, and he would have had to do some rudder dance on the final end of the dive to stay lined up. And he did not. It's evident in the FDR recreation that this was not the case.

So in lieu of screaming at Mr. Stutts and Mr. Legge for decoding 'bull****' as I called it, which is in fact their prerogative, I do have to admonish them for believing an 80 ton airliner flown by neophytes could round out in the bottom of a very steep dive, with a lot of downward inertia, and then slide into the CATCHERS MIT like that.

and now I want to call your attention to photos taken of the Pentagon wall within the first five or so minutes of impact.

Yep, a frenchman published a piece about this utter absurdity, and had those unretouched pics in his presentation. In them, you can clearly see vertical steel studs or parts of the wall, behind the entry hole that an 80 ton, 460 knot airliner just entered.

Was this plane made out of silly putty?

No engine entry points, no wing slots, meaning wings would have been outside the building, as there was such a paucity of wreckage, for them to be converted to pure energy release at impact, the resultant force would have obliterated that quarter of the buuilding. No empennage wreckage, no engine penetration holes, no vertical stabilzer. No luggage, no bodies, no seats. No nothing.

Now, later on, there are pics of what are presumably F.B.I. guys strewing wreckage around, and in one photo, the rivet holes have obvious corrosion marks from them. Am I to believe that piece corroded in an hour or two? From what? Why is it that the moderately pristine and amost immaculate lawn, suddenly starts to sprout parts?

I can't tell you how parts sprout up except that NO F.B.I. would put their badges in their pockets while strewing wreckage you are not supposed to move, under any circumstances. They had no license to touch that stuff. It's an aircraft CRASH SITE, for christs sake. Why the badges in pockets? Why?

April Gallop mentioned she crawled thru this 'inferno hole' just after it was created, with her son on her back. She sustained no major burns. Her hair wasn't on fire. She didn't suffer significant smoke inhalation. How can this be.

How can an 80 ton aircraft vaporize it's wings, vertical and horizontal stabilizers, and one engine that never was recovered? How could the one engine get into the building without an entry hole?

Mr. Legge, Mr Stutts, I'm not going to scream at you for decoding and then writing this paper you wrote, but clearly, neither of you has taken the time to study this event like some of us have. There are so many 'from an experienced pilot' standpoint holes, that it doesn't compute even a little bit.

and the icing on this entire 'merde' cake, is the no ACFT ID and no FLEET ID in the FDR data preamble.

and I'll go one step further. The N.T.S.B., the F.B.I., and the F.A.A., had no constructive reason to hide from all of us, particularly Aidan Monaghan, who submitted the F.O.I.A., that just wanted these parts of this plane to be identified by serial number.

Because, Mr. Legge, and Mr. Stutts, these planes create a huge paper trail when they are built. Those documents would have reinforced the government's assertion that N644AA hit the building and was destroyed that day. The on the spot, almost premeditatedly confiscated video tapes the F.B.I. grabbed that would show the plane, are not available fo rus to look at.

and for god's sake, why did it take the F.A.A. more than THREE YEARS to strike these involved aircraft from the F.A.A. registries?

I'll tell you why. Because these planes weren't involved. We know '2' were at the WTC, but we have no constructive proof that the plane the F.A.A. lost track of over the W. Virginia 'radar hole' where the FPS-117 long range, 3-d airsearch radar is located, by the way, is now said to have hit the Pentagon. Because without meeting certain criteria, per Robin Hordon's excellent outcry over this fact, that flight could never be positively known to be FLT-77.

Because, per Gerard Holmgren's excellent work, we know that FLT-77 wasn't even a scheduled carrier flight on Sept. 11th. 2001.

So I clearly have many many many problems with this from any number of standpoints, the most significant one is the bogus FDR data that is non-reality, which you so faithfully, painstakingly decoded the 4 seconds that the N.T.S.B. swears on a stack of bibles more or less, that it was unable to decode. Something is seriously wrong with this entire picture, and I am not accusing either of you of being putzes, but I think that you miss a whole lot of valid, very real reasons your assertions cannot stand in a reality based world of real aeronautics, real physics, and real airplane flight limits, when 'incompetent' pilots were allegedly performing these feats of magic you show in your paper. It's just not real, guys!

Dennis then loses it slightly and goes on to say.......


Mr. Stutts:

I now have to define your entire 'work product' as utter and total BULL****. You had about 4 days to come up with a better bull**** story than this one, and to propose that AC ID and FLEET ID are buried in the flight parameter stream after the preamble, where it always always always is, is so beyond the pale and absurd, that it's now not conjecture that you're a COIN OP (counterintelligence) from either the U.S. government, or the mossad, but you're actually a very badly managed one, to float this ****.

You failed to address any of the incongruencies I published about the entire event, not even one of them. Now, as a non pilot, I don't expect you to try to understand how the entire thing is absurdity from the very start to assert that an 80 ton plane went thru the 'cat door' at the Pentagon, and didn't leave any wreckage till the F.B.I. began to seed it later that morning with the Buga, Colombia jungle weathered wreckage. I can understand that, as you would have no way to explain the lack of aircraft upset during a violent and ugly hijacking, and also, the Altimeter setting in the NTSB fabricated crap in one of their products, because they were so sloppy they failed to both see it and understand it's importance here, in that this, as well as the no aircraft upset, and the lack of rudder inputs, while not on A/P., and the impossible pullout from the dive, all were so impossible that only in a child's game could any of this hokey **** be believable.

So now I have to say for the record you guys are a COIN OP for the people who did this. I gave you the benefit of the doubt to prove you were not a bull**** mill for Sunstein's cognitive infiltration network of zio prostitutes for Israel, and you totally blew that gig here.

I tell you what. Go sell this to the National Enquirer. They might print your dissertation. But no meaningful and relevant aviation based analysis validates any of your turd feed here, because virtuallly all of your stuff has borne itself out to be so absurd that even the Enquirer would probably balk at publishing your disinformation.

I'm sorry, Mr. Stutts, but you unmasked yourself with this total, utter bull**** today. And we didn't even have to do it for you, you did it yourself.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20999&st=0&start=0

mr legge
http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/imagesqtbnANd9GcSn1WAt3p48GFWTti8Un.jpg

mr stutts
http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/23264_100000034555266_3188_n.jpg

can someone please point out where the plane is , as i seem to have some inability to see planes were others can.

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/pentagoncctvll1.gif

all i can see is a date stamp thats a day off and a subliminal message telling me plane inpact in the right hand corner.


http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx171/naf09_2010/9%2011%20and%207%207/spplane.jpg


:frusty::frusty::frusty:

Can you cut and paste all that into a new thread? Its sort of off topic for this one.
We can get into the details in the new thread. :)

[Prodigal Son]

can someone please point out where the plane is , as i seem to have some inability to see planes were others can.


Well, Rummy told us it was a missile. Sure looks like a missile from that 5-frame release by the Pentagon. A 757 would have been clearly visible in that clip.

I don't know if this has been posted here before, so please pardon me if it has, but I found this to be very telling:

This is from the website of the BTS (Bureau of Transportation Statistics). This is the official site where all flights are logged and tracked. The page I had bookmarked is currently down, giving me a message that says "Sorry, the database is currently being updated or repaired. Please try again later."

http://www.bts.gov/xml/ontimesummarystatistics/src/dstat/OntimeSummaryDepatures.xml

I don't know if that means it's permanently down or not, but I happen to have posted it on another forum and I'm going to try inserting the image here. It shows that Flight 11 never took off from Logan Airport on the morning of 9/11/01. I hope this works....

http://letsrollforums.com/imagehosting/347a6a63d29e0b.jpg

[brenie]

Let us not split hairs, the only question, is Farrakhan speaking the truth on this matter.
Don't shoot the messenger!

Regards, Brenie

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Fact: For years, the media and debunkers have tried to paint this cause as anti-semitic.

Fact: Going to speak to a group of individuals that are known for their anti-semitism gives ammunition to our detractors to paint us as anti-semitic.

Fail.

[nf857]

Here's a thought maybe its done by technology we can't even bein to imagine, no amount of theorising will un-cover the truth, until somebody tells us about this technology, maybe it was done with holographic planes that covered up UFO'S & the government does not want it to become knowledge that aliens have attacked, or that PTB are shape-shifting aliens, draining all our resources & material into a tightly knit machine it can take off with!!! As nineagle states we know the financial reasons why it was done, we know it was corrupt, however we can't make sense of how it was done NF please excuse me ive not read any books yet about 9/11 however have read a lot on the net & watched a lot of documentaries about within the truth movement x

[nf857]

P.S Yes a highly advanced type of cigar looking missle would make sense cloaked with holographic plane technology, heard the theory if you think it, usually it can be done!!!

Science fiction film 'The Thing' could replicate itself or shapeshift itself into anything it wanted, perhaps just from enough people watching this film, we made it possible in our collective minds, for 'The Thing' to exist!!! May seem far-fetched but ive researched consiouness now for approximatley 9 years, it has threads through history, & in any other theories and subjects x

[ThePythonicCow]

I am glad to see that EYES WIDE OPEN is getting little traction on this thread for his efforts to raise more controversy over the second layer of the 9/11 story.

By "first layer" I mean the official Arab hijackers story, and by "second layer" I mean the demolition and thermite story. I consider Judy Wood's evidence and analysis to be the third layer of this onion, and likely much closer to the truth. The evidence she has gathered, in particular, is a major contribution to our understanding of the events of 9/11. Those who would ignore, dismiss, bash or otherwise try to distract us from that evidence are doing us a disservice.

I recommend chapters 29 "Manufacturing The Apocalypse" and 30 "A World of Abundance or a World of Scarcity" of Andrew Johnson's "9-11 - Finding the Truth". This book is available for download from his website 911-Finding the Truth - Free Download - Book (http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=238&Itemid=60). Andrew lays out a good case for the connection between 9/11, free energy, and the current abusive power control structure on this planet.

See also the other two Dr. Judy Wood threads that have been active on this forum in the last few days:

Dr. Judy Wood and John Lash The quintessential talk on 911 (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?32217-Dr.-Judy-Wood-and-John-Lash-The-quintessential-talk-on-911)
"Where Did The Towers Go?" - Dr Judy Wood in the UK....Sky 200 TV with Theo Chalmers. (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?41614-Where-Did-The-Towers-Go-Dr-Judy-Wood-in-the-UK....Sky-200-TV-with-Theo-Chalmers.)

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I note that my explanations for Judys evidence have been mostly ignored. Fingers in ears.



Look at this video. It clearly shows the spire falling straight down.
You can track the top of it. IT DOES NOT TURN TO DUST. IT FALLS STRAIGHT DOWN. or will you not believe your own eyes. watch it a few times.
From the 1 min mark:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dWBBEtA5bI&feature=related


This one is even clearer:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0QQN8VlwUE

WATCH IT FALL. FROM ABOUT 2:45. THE SPIRE IS SOLD ALL THE WAY DOWN. YOU CAN EVEN SEE THE DUST FALL OFF IT. THIS DUST FROM A DIFFERENT ANGLE IS WHAT CONFUSED JUDY. THIS FOOTAGE PROVES SHE IS WRONG. COMPLEATLY WRONG.

DUST IS DISPLACED. Are people seriously sugessting that no dust landed on the spire and the rest of New York was covered in dust?! That is what you have to believe if you think that no dust landed on the spire and think the spire simply vanished due to space lazers or DEW.

Here is a challenge. Present what you consider the top 3 best bits of evidence form Judy wood. I will try and explain them using logic. What do you think guys?

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

I am glad to see that EYES WIDE OPEN is getting little traction on this thread for his efforts to raise more controversy over the second layer of the 9/11 story.


T What I call expressing my opinion, you call "raising controversy". Why? Is it because my opinion is not the same as yours? Therefore anything you don't agree with is controversial?

Surely a more honest and less suspicious mind would simply say that I disagree with you rather than go on the defensive and say I am trying to "raise more controversy". Why would you say that? Its almost as if you are trying to label me a disruptor so you don't have to deal with my arguments?

Or have I got the wrong meaning from your sentence? Apologies if so.