It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A B757 hit the Pentagon, reported by GOFER06

page: 29
65
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 06:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: whyamIhere









I've seen those pictures.

I would expect to see a 1000x's more than that.

That's all that's left from a jetliner.

Not nearly enough. But, it's just my opinion.

I'm no expert. Just comparing it to every other crash I've see.




posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:18 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

That's like saying every car crash should look the same, no matter how it happens. Every plane crash is different. In over 95% of them, they're trying desperately to land, and are in control, and impact the terrain flat, and at low speed. In a handful, they impact at high speed, and steep angles, and leave a very small footprint, with lots of debris scattered around. But every one of them is different.







This was a DC-10 prior to impact.






posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

And yet every single crash site has vast amounts more material than the pentagon and shanksville combined.

I have seen helicopter crash sites with more left overs.

A high mountainous area where many planes have crashed, as a youth I observed and was blown away how much is left there in comparison, it beggars belief.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

And yet those crashes tended to be in areas where the ground was significantly harder than Shanksville, and that wreckage wasn't buried in a building like the Pentagon. When a plane hits a hard area, or at low speed it leaves debris scattered over a big area. When it hits soft ground, it tends to bury itself. Flight 93 recovered over 90% of the aircraft from below ground level.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: LaBTop
This is another factual interesting Miles Kara page, titled : Category: Mystery Plane
www.oredigger61.org...



This is a good site from what I have seen and heard so far. The snippets of audio are extracted from the larger audio files but the author sets up the conversation with leading story and explanation. It's a good way for someone to hear some of the activity and coordination without having to weed through the full audio file. The only caution to provide is these snippets in the story line of his posts are not in particular chronological order.

I also went through the documents in the Miles Kara page but didn't come across anything that jumped out at me. Much of what is in there is audio transcripts of what I have listening to in the tapes from the 911Datasets.

I will say I haven't come across anything that can support Norm Minetas testimony in regards to the aircraft approaching. There is no indication from anyone and no audio that implicates any site, FAA or military, knowing the position of AAL77 before it passes due south of IAD.

I would even suggest that the ZID controllers and the NTMOs at Herndon were suspecting a crash at the location it disappeared from radar or even a continued the flight along the flight plan route. They were looking towards the west and even suggested Chicago could be a target for AAL77.

There was some ambiguity with AAL11's position even after the WTC impact. An inaccurate premise that the first aircraft to hit the WTC was not AAL11 it kept flying south to Washington DC. This however did not have any reports or even estimates passed for positions in relation to DC.

So if Mineta has the correct information, someone was passing these position reports along to Cheney that is not come to light. I'm not sure this testimony that Mineta gave is accurate or factual.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ParasuvO

And yet those crashes tended to be in areas where the ground was significantly harder than Shanksville, and that wreckage wasn't buried in a building like the Pentagon. When a plane hits a hard area, or at low speed it leaves debris scattered over a big area. When it hits soft ground, it tends to bury itself. Flight 93 recovered over 90% of the aircraft from below ground level.


It amazes me how people still think there was no plane, because "there were no pieces of a plane". Then you show them pieces of the plane, and they still say there was no plane because they didn't photograph every single piece. There's pretty much no piece of evidence you could offer to convince some folks, they are hardcore worshipers of the conspiracy theory.



posted on Mar, 27 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: LaBTop
This is another factual interesting Miles Kara page, titled : Category: Mystery Plane
www.oredigger61.org...



This is a good site from what I have seen and heard so far. The snippets of audio are extracted from the larger audio files but the author sets up the conversation with leading story and explanation. It's a good way for someone to hear some of the activity and coordination without having to weed through the full audio file. The only caution to provide is these snippets in the story line of his posts are not in particular chronological order.

I also went through the documents in the Miles Kara page but didn't come across anything that jumped out at me. Much of what is in there is audio transcripts of what I have listening to in the tapes from the 911Datasets.

I will say I haven't come across anything that can support Norm Minetas testimony in regards to the aircraft approaching. There is no indication from anyone and no audio that implicates any site, FAA or military, knowing the position of AAL77 before it passes due south of IAD.

I would even suggest that the ZID controllers and the NTMOs at Herndon were suspecting a crash at the location it disappeared from radar or even a continued the flight along the flight plan route. They were looking towards the west and even suggested Chicago could be a target for AAL77.

There was some ambiguity with AAL11's position even after the WTC impact. An inaccurate premise that the first aircraft to hit the WTC was not AAL11 it kept flying south to Washington DC. This however did not have any reports or even estimates passed for positions in relation to DC.

So if Mineta has the correct information, someone was passing these position reports along to Cheney that is not come to light. I'm not sure this testimony that Mineta gave is accurate or factual.


It almost sounds like some unforeseen event happened and nobody really knew what the hell was going on. Who'da thunk'it?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO

In most crashes, the pilot(s) are trying to avoid the crash. On 9/11 that was not the case. And from the reports at least at Shanksville, they recovered wreckage adding up to about 90% of the airliner's weight. Maybe one day they will release all the photos, but, given the firemen's reports of finding things like three vertebrae of a spine with rib fragments still attached....I doubt we will ever see all the photos.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Salander
It's fascinating to see so much discussion about an event that did not happen LOL. So much bandwidth in honor of Ol' Hani, Ace Pilot. Cold-blooded killer slits throats of airliner crew, straps on the Big Boeing, and flies a maneuver most line pilots consider to be impossible.

Yes, the Emperor's New Clothes are beautiful, eh?


The whole point here is that the data shows he didn't have to be an ace pilot. There's no reason to believe he executed that turn, dove sharply and leveled off sharply with enough Gs to rip the wings off, yet miraculously kept it a few feet off the ground and then flew the last 5 seconds of the flight, 3/4 of a mile, at that altitude. That's the event that didn't happen. Most pilots say a rookie pilot couldn't do that; I'd be inclined to agree, and there's no reason to believe he did.

He executed the turn, then descended into the Pentagon. None of the data you guys are providing shows otherwise. You're insisting he pulled this Top Gun manuever for no apparent reason. It simply wouldn't be necessary to do this in order to hit the building.


What data shows he didn't have to be an ace pilot? If the comments of his flight instructors counts as "data", he was a really bad pilot, in Cessnas.

The "data" from the FDR, as analyzed by Dennis Cimino, was concocted. According to Cimino, the unit was not assigned an airframe. It is bogus, and the feds had about 5 years to cook the data, since it took them 5 years to respond to the FOIA request. The data was there, but it took them 5 years to send it out. What were they doing in 5 years? Making "data" up, is what it looks like.

The maneuver was impossible, the data was forged, there was no debris at the site consistent with a crashed airliner, numerous eye witnesses observed an airliner go by, but in the wrong flight path to strike the building as it supposedly did. The pentagon, I am sorry to say, is notorious for its mendacity.

All that, the preponderance of the evidence, show the story to be impossible. Why should I believe it?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: LaBTop
This is another factual interesting Miles Kara page, titled : Category: Mystery Plane
www.oredigger61.org...



This is a good site from what I have seen and heard so far. The snippets of audio are extracted from the larger audio files but the author sets up the conversation with leading story and explanation. It's a good way for someone to hear some of the activity and coordination without having to weed through the full audio file. The only caution to provide is these snippets in the story line of his posts are not in particular chronological order.

I also went through the documents in the Miles Kara page but didn't come across anything that jumped out at me. Much of what is in there is audio transcripts of what I have listening to in the tapes from the 911Datasets.

I will say I haven't come across anything that can support Norm Minetas testimony in regards to the aircraft approaching. There is no indication from anyone and no audio that implicates any site, FAA or military, knowing the position of AAL77 before it passes due south of IAD.

I would even suggest that the ZID controllers and the NTMOs at Herndon were suspecting a crash at the location it disappeared from radar or even a continued the flight along the flight plan route. They were looking towards the west and even suggested Chicago could be a target for AAL77.

There was some ambiguity with AAL11's position even after the WTC impact. An inaccurate premise that the first aircraft to hit the WTC was not AAL11 it kept flying south to Washington DC. This however did not have any reports or even estimates passed for positions in relation to DC.

So if Mineta has the correct information, someone was passing these position reports along to Cheney that is not come to light. I'm not sure this testimony that Mineta gave is accurate or factual.


It almost sounds like some unforeseen event happened and nobody really knew what the hell was going on. Who'da thunk'it?


EXACTLY!

I listen to the tapes and I have no doubt that what unfolds, at least with the FAA, is that they were reacting to a situation that had no clarity in how to defend.

Many of us have had 16+ years to review, examine, debate, research external information, including what was leading up to and following etc.. And we are not able to say with absolute conviction what happened.

This also pertains to the tapes I heard with regard to the military. The responses, instructions and information also supports the lack of clarity and they were reacting to the same unfolding event.

I can say without any reservation that the FAA was not trained to manage something like this or even close to this. Many of the elements within the event were trained such as a hijack or loss of radar/radio at the same time, a facility or airline OC evacuating or many of the other things but when these things were trained, they were never coupled together to prepare for these occurring at the same time. All of these things happening at pretty much the same time, was not something ever even thought of prior to this day.

Now that being said, is there still unanswered questions for me, yes there are. I am not sure they'll ever come out though.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Salander
It's fascinating to see so much discussion about an event that did not happen LOL. So much bandwidth in honor of Ol' Hani, Ace Pilot. Cold-blooded killer slits throats of airliner crew, straps on the Big Boeing, and flies a maneuver most line pilots consider to be impossible.

Yes, the Emperor's New Clothes are beautiful, eh?


The whole point here is that the data shows he didn't have to be an ace pilot. There's no reason to believe he executed that turn, dove sharply and leveled off sharply with enough Gs to rip the wings off, yet miraculously kept it a few feet off the ground and then flew the last 5 seconds of the flight, 3/4 of a mile, at that altitude. That's the event that didn't happen. Most pilots say a rookie pilot couldn't do that; I'd be inclined to agree, and there's no reason to believe he did.

He executed the turn, then descended into the Pentagon. None of the data you guys are providing shows otherwise. You're insisting he pulled this Top Gun manuever for no apparent reason. It simply wouldn't be necessary to do this in order to hit the building.


What data shows he didn't have to be an ace pilot? If the comments of his flight instructors counts as "data", he was a really bad pilot, in Cessnas.

The "data" from the FDR, as analyzed by Dennis Cimino, was concocted. According to Cimino, the unit was not assigned an airframe. It is bogus, and the feds had about 5 years to cook the data, since it took them 5 years to respond to the FOIA request. The data was there, but it took them 5 years to send it out. What were they doing in 5 years? Making "data" up, is what it looks like.

The maneuver was impossible, the data was forged, there was no debris at the site consistent with a crashed airliner, numerous eye witnesses observed an airliner go by, but in the wrong flight path to strike the building as it supposedly did. The pentagon, I am sorry to say, is notorious for its mendacity.

All that, the preponderance of the evidence, show the story to be impossible. Why should I believe it?


Radar data from different sources not matching doesn't change the fact that the maneuvers required to fly into the building were routine. There's no evidence that he executed an air show dive and pulled out of it at the last second and then flew the last 5 seconds 20 feet off the ground. That's something people just made up to say "look there's no way he could've done that!" But there's no evidence of it. Not to mention it would make no sense to do that, either from an actual hijacker pilot's perspective or from the supposed hoaxers' perspective. Why would they sit around a table and be like 'yeah let's make the official story that he pulled off these top gun maneuvers with no training, that'll keep the public guessing'? Get real.

All that was required was a slow turn to get lined up, then a dive into the ground. These are very basic maneuvers, far from impossible. Your narrative is full of holes and has no evidence. There may not be enough evidence of a plane for you, but it's infinitely more evidence than there is for your narrative because anything is infinitely more than zero.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: LaBTop
This is another factual interesting Miles Kara page, titled : Category: Mystery Plane
www.oredigger61.org...



This is a good site from what I have seen and heard so far. The snippets of audio are extracted from the larger audio files but the author sets up the conversation with leading story and explanation. It's a good way for someone to hear some of the activity and coordination without having to weed through the full audio file. The only caution to provide is these snippets in the story line of his posts are not in particular chronological order.

I also went through the documents in the Miles Kara page but didn't come across anything that jumped out at me. Much of what is in there is audio transcripts of what I have listening to in the tapes from the 911Datasets.

I will say I haven't come across anything that can support Norm Minetas testimony in regards to the aircraft approaching. There is no indication from anyone and no audio that implicates any site, FAA or military, knowing the position of AAL77 before it passes due south of IAD.

I would even suggest that the ZID controllers and the NTMOs at Herndon were suspecting a crash at the location it disappeared from radar or even a continued the flight along the flight plan route. They were looking towards the west and even suggested Chicago could be a target for AAL77.

There was some ambiguity with AAL11's position even after the WTC impact. An inaccurate premise that the first aircraft to hit the WTC was not AAL11 it kept flying south to Washington DC. This however did not have any reports or even estimates passed for positions in relation to DC.

So if Mineta has the correct information, someone was passing these position reports along to Cheney that is not come to light. I'm not sure this testimony that Mineta gave is accurate or factual.


It almost sounds like some unforeseen event happened and nobody really knew what the hell was going on. Who'da thunk'it?


EXACTLY!

I listen to the tapes and I have no doubt that what unfolds, at least with the FAA, is that they were reacting to a situation that had no clarity in how to defend.

Many of us have had 16+ years to review, examine, debate, research external information, including what was leading up to and following etc.. And we are not able to say with absolute conviction what happened.

This also pertains to the tapes I heard with regard to the military. The responses, instructions and information also supports the lack of clarity and they were reacting to the same unfolding event.

I can say without any reservation that the FAA was not trained to manage something like this or even close to this. Many of the elements within the event were trained such as a hijack or loss of radar/radio at the same time, a facility or airline OC evacuating or many of the other things but when these things were trained, they were never coupled together to prepare for these occurring at the same time. All of these things happening at pretty much the same time, was not something ever even thought of prior to this day.

Now that being said, is there still unanswered questions for me, yes there are. I am not sure they'll ever come out though.


Exactly. This whole thing was just the military and the FAA being unprepared. A bunch of people who have no idea how our military works think because the military is a bunch of superheros in movies and tv that this never could have happened like this. The reality is that we were unprepared. Our security and defense apparatus simply wasn't set up to deal with a scenario like this. We were complacent, and the attackers took advantage of it. I hate to break it to people, but we are still unprepared in some areas. Our intelligence and defense bureaucracy is overcomplicated and inefficient, and our technology and readiness has been badly suffering under budget cuts. It's a minor miracle nothing like this has happened since. The further away we get from 9/11, the more people think we don't need the security measures. We are slowly reverting back to pre-9/11 naivety.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 07:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: LaBTop

Could you, pale5218, look into my BOBCAT14, BOBCAT17 and WORD31 (E-4B, Doomsday plane) remarks in this 2009 post of mine in there :
www.abovetopsecret.com...




FAA, Andrews AFB (ADW) Tower flight progress strips: (I took out link, not working)
There are two strips for SWORD31; why, I have no clue.


The two progress strips for WORD31, one is an arrival strip has a CID bottom left '512', its a computer strip CID. The 5672 is the beacon code and the flight is landing ADW with estimated arrival time 1114Z.

The other strip CID 566 is a departure strip with the flight plan info. Proposed departure time 1330Z, beacon code 0512 departing ADW and requesting an altitude of FL310, 31, 000ft. The route of flight is the ADW..AML..to OFF which is the destination.



BOBCAT14 disappears from the screen at UTC 12:37:19 after he got redirected to Washington Central (listen to the mp3), and ordered to change frequency and/or transponder setting to 284.7 . He probably changed his transponder setting and that's why he disappeared from the DCA TRACON radar screen.
BOBCAT17 however, was all the remaining time visible on the DCA TRACON screen, even after he was ordered to change frequency or transponder setting to the same 284.7 setting, much later.
I suppose Washington Central in the mp3 is a military air traffic controller.


The assessment on BOBCT14 is correct with the exception of the disappearing from the radar screen. Transponder changes are generally not done in this handoff. I suspect this flight left radar coverage from a vertical exit.

The ASR9 is a terminal radar, not long range, so the high altitudes are obscured close in or just overhead the airport. It is the "cone of silence". If you took a funnel and placed the small end over the radar site with the larger end upward, the airspace with in this "funnel" is poor to non existent, this represents that cone of silence coverage. I hope this makes sense.


We know of the story of Cheney, getting informed of the plane being 20 miles out, 10 miles out, 5 miles out, and then he told an aid that ""the orders still stood"", and ""why should they have changed""; he asked that aid.
So why were the FAA controllers not immediately informed, when the Secret Service was aware minutes in advance, that flight 77 was on course to Washington?


I think this is important to the accounts by the executives Cheney, Mineta etc.. The testimony is 50, 30 10 miles which is not possible based on what is provided as evidence in audio tapes and radar. This could only be accurate if the call to the PEOC came from an unknown source.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:45 PM
link   
A reply to: face23785


There's no evidence that he executed an air show dive and pulled out of it at the last second and then flew the last 5 seconds 20 feet off the ground.


You contradict yourself in your own terms.
You can't fly another 5 seconds after the last second.
"Then" should have been "that he".

Btw, the officially released two DoD security boots their camera videos show a perfectly horizontal smoke column left behind the damaged right jet engine. As we of course deducted to have been caused by the 5 cut light poles.
In my opinion we are carefully led to intended conclusions by very unsharp, out of focus, officially released video and other data material.

The DFDR data given to us after FOIA requests indicate only about 0.2 to 0.5 seconds last moments flight time in which that plane flew within your guessed 20 feet off the ground.
Read-outs from some barometric and other height measuring parameters in that DFDR's last --garbled up-- second indicate that.

Over the past few years, several people came up with a full "translation" of those officially endorsed DFDR parameters.
One of them came however suddenly up with an additional last 4 to 6 seconds flight time DFDR data, on top of the officially released data.
Which OS data ended 4 seconds before impact, which in itself is already an impossible fact, why should all DFDR equipment fail, when the plane was still flying).
He explained it as being more and more garbled DFDR data, the nearer you came to the impact moment, which the official DFDR translators had not included, because of their unstable or unsustainable nature. And these last seconds held the height parameters above the lawn.

His last 4 to 6 seconds were never officially endorsed, only a deafening silence from that side.
Much later information about him came out, which indicated he had or was still working for the Australian Secret Service. (You never stop working for these institutions, even if it looks like it).

I do not trust that whole DFDR.!
Why? See this EXPLANATION by Dennis Cimino, an experienced DFDR decoder who came forward because he got really upset by the officially endorsed, but bogus explanations. READ his rant, he really is a professional DFDR decoder. "They" never thought such a professional would come out the woodwork in the open. Thank you again, Dennis, for your honesty to history.
Dennis is by now also, just as me and many others with me, a tad bit pissed off on Rob Balsamo from PilotsForTruth for his Machiavellian machinations on his web site. Dennis left them.

Many signs indicate to me, that an extremely careful designed post-9/11 damage-contamination and psy-ops operation exists, designed to sow as much confusion as possible under common readers of the subject, but also between honest researchers, be it patriotic ones, neutral ones, or, one way or the other, biassed ones.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:49 PM
link   
A reply to: pale5218

Pale5218, I am sincerely interested which questions these are :

Now that being said, is there still unanswered questions for me, yes there are. I am not sure they'll ever come out though.

Are they (your) work-related.?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

The last second. As in, "...the last second (before he hit the ground) and continued flying".



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:12 PM
link   
A reply to: Zaphod58

Yup, you're right.
What do you think of that seemingly very upset rant by Dennis Cimino, I linked to above.?
Does he have a point ?



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

Without a lot more experience with data recorders and reading the details that usually are buried in accident reports, I don't know. Our aircraft didn't use data recorders, except for the ones that either started as commercial aircraft, or were modified civilian designs. But I know the whole door argument was proven to be totally false. As for the rest of it, I don't know enough about them to say one way or the other.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: ParasuvO

And yet those crashes tended to be in areas where the ground was significantly harder than Shanksville, and that wreckage wasn't buried in a building like the Pentagon. When a plane hits a hard area, or at low speed it leaves debris scattered over a big area. When it hits soft ground, it tends to bury itself. Flight 93 recovered over 90% of the aircraft from below ground level.


It amazes me how people still think there was no plane, because "there were no pieces of a plane". Then you show them pieces of the plane, and they still say there was no plane because they didn't photograph every single piece. There's pretty much no piece of evidence you could offer to convince some folks, they are hardcore worshipers of the conspiracy theory.


Yet they will entertain the idea that a Russian missile retrieved from a sub that sank would be used, just blows me away.



posted on Mar, 28 2017 @ 11:56 PM
link   
A reply to: pale5218


I think this is important to the accounts by the executives Cheney, Mineta etc.. The testimony is 50, 30 10 miles which is not possible based on what is provided as evidence in audio tapes and radar. This could only be accurate if the call to the PEOC came from an unknown source.


I think Cheyenne Mountain is your unknown source that provided information to the VP Cheney and his crew under the White House. Since they get all military Primary Main Radar data first.

See this T8-B15-Hijacked-Airplaner-2-of-3-Fdr-AA-77-Radar-Based-Timeline-and-Maps-FAA-NORAD-Transcript-Info

Then look at this number 1 of 24 diagrams first, it's by the way the first one from those 24 with "Committee Sensitive" printed under it.
WHY did the 9/11Committee deemed it necessairy to label all those 8 diagrams that way.? Was it too sensitive to publish at that time? Or were they told so by the White House? :



As you see, NORAD lost it only for 18:52 min/secs and reacquired its radar returns by The Plains radar (see nr 23 diagram, that's 180 miles out) as Primary only at 09:09:30 already again, that's 29 minutes before it reached the Pentagon. So, yes, it is quite possible to have been reported by that young military aide that informed Cheney, according to Mineta, that the plane was now 50 miles out.
See also its Scribd page-diagrams nrs 3, 8, 9, 10, 11 etcetera, but especially 23 where you see that 5 Main radar sites in total, recorded AA 77 during those 180 miles out :





top topics



 
65
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join