It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I don't see any airplane parts that resembles flight 77 in all those photos.
see, I was not aware that people had to be experts to view a plane crash. Thanks for clearing that up for me.
Well, the wheel hubs, engine wreckage, and flaps of a B-757 were right there for all to see. It would have been no problem finding part and serial numbers since aircraft parts are labeled.
Has anyone been able to confirm those part numbers belong to said plane?
Why would they since American 77 was tracked on radar to the Pentagon crash site? I am very sure the photo of those flaps belong to American 77, and let's not forget, American Airlines confirmed the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon.
LT :I forgot to add this security cam photo, overexposed by the light of the explosion, it shows the best outline of the base-line of the Pentagon's west wall
LT : It's video time stamp (2:33 / 9:59) is in this above screen-shot, so a genuine peer reviewer of my evidence for a 2 times longer NoC flying B-757 length, when compared to the height of the west wall at the column 14 impact point, can look that video frame up, to use it to check my thin red lines drawings, without being bothered by my added-in blue wall-base line :
SE409 : Actually, the dimensions are right on the money when the flight path and distance are taken into consideration. A point that conspiracy theorist seem to overlook.
Thank you for answering my question and the answer you gave me is no.
So there is "no evidence" on record, that crash debris were from said planes.
So all we get are some photos taken by? where? when?
As far as I am concern, those photos that are all over the internet could be airplane parts from any bone yard.
SE409 : Referring to the last two photos of your post, the height of the Pentagon is 77 feet while the height of a B-757 is 44 feet, 6 inches, which is more than half the height of the Pentagon.
With that information, mark the top of the vertical stabilizer of the B-757 and mark that point as "A". To make it simple, now place a mark 50 feet above ground level on the Pentagon wall at the impact point and record that mark as "B". Next, draw a straight line from point "A" to point "B".
The angle will provide the undeniable flight path of American 77 that points to a south-of-the-gas station flight path, ---
---but if you want to do it the easy way using that photo, look at the angle of the smoke trail from #2 engine in relation to the Pentagon wall after it ingested foreign objects and the damaged light poles clearly indicate a south-of-the-gas station flight path because there are no damaged light poles that would have indicated a NoC flight path and yet, we have a damaged engine from the collision with a light pole that clearly indicates a south-of-the-gas station flight path. You failed to take that into consideration that there are no damaged light poles that would have indicated a NoC flight path, not to mention that you failed to draw a straight line from the outer impact hole to the C-ring hole, which is further proof of a south-of-the-gas station flight path, especially when that line is extended and matched with the downed light poles and damaged generator.
It is evident that your calculations are off by a wide margin and I tend to look at the minor details that others usually miss. ---
SE409 : It is evident that your calculations are off by a wide margin and I tend to look at the minor details that others usually miss. As an aircraft structural inspector in the Air Force and for major defense contractors, I know what little details to look for.
Suspicion persisted during the inquiry, and is now shown to have been justified because the fact that the flight recorders had indeed been exchanged for false ones was demonstrated scientifically on 18 May 1988 by the Scientific and Criminal Police Institute of Lausanne in Switzerland.
Page 4 : It follows that one can evidently not credit conclusions based on data on tapes of illegally diverted flight recorders, data which is so incompatible that the only explanation is forgery.
Switching the flight recorders enabled the flight data to be forged and the traces of this
forgery are there to prove it.
Page 4 : Here follows a synthesis of the facts as of June 1998, it contains the following sections:-
1) Why were the flight recorders switched?
2) The expertise in Lausanne of wreck photos demonstrating the recorder switch.
3) How the recorders were switched.
4) The omissions of certain legal experts.
5) The way the flight data tapes were forged; method, timing, opportunity.
Page 9 : The results of the examination of the photos by the Scientific Police Institute of Lausanne
Page 13 : Switching the flight recorders necessitated that the serial numbers of the false recorders should not be recorded, because they were not the serial numbers shown in the aircraft's delivery documents. --snip--
The flight recorders were in the hands of the law for only 6 days in the year following the crash, thus allowing time for forgery of the data.
The scandal of the Airbus A320 crash at Habsheim, France.
Christian Roger is a professional pilot. He was leader of the French air force's aerobatics team and, later, a Boeing 747 Flight Captain with Air France.
He was President of the leading French pilots' union, the SNPL, at the time an Airbus A320
crashed into trees at Habsheim in Eastern France in June 1988.
The pilot, Michel Asseline, stumbled out of the blazing wreck saying the engines failed to
pick up. The SNPL supported the pilot, then gradually stood back and let things happen, when
expert examination of the black boxes produced overwhelming evidence showing the A320 to
be perfect. The pilot was sentenced to prison on this evidence.
Christian Roger retired and watched from the side-lines. One day he realized that some of the crash data just released was rubbish. He looked closer at other crash data and that did not
stand up to scrutiny either. He undertook a mammoth scrutiny of all the crash data supplied
by the witnesses and aeronautical experts in two commissions of inquiries, one judicial inquiry and three court cases.
He exposed multiple anomalies, not to say lies, in the experts' evidence and in the data of the crash all of which pointed to a very high level, state inspired plot to whitewash the aircraft in the crash and confirmed what the pilot had been saying all along. He joined the pilot's defense team.
His report to the SNPL, the French pilots' union, presented here in English, is a summary of those anomalies, discrepancies, omissions and distortions in a civilized nation's official Inquiry and Judicial system. The whole story of this Airbus crash and the high level plot to forge the data is to be found in the forthcoming book by Michel Asseline and Terry Anson.
How on earth you think it's correct to determine an attack ANGLE in a 2 dimensional photo taken along the base of the west wall, and its viewing field perpendicular on the real (NoC) or virtual (SoC) length of that plane, by drawing a line in that flat (not 3-dimensional, a laser cube f.ex.) photo from tail fin top to its point of impact on the west wall, is beyond my, and I suppose everyone else, comprehension. And then also use the word undeniable, that's really daring for someone who seems to lack any comprehension of geometry, trigonometry or stereometry.