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.

 

How Did the Hijackers Find the Pentagon, Anyway?

page: 8
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

2. O'Brien NEVER "trailed" the plane at all. He passed by it as it was moving into it's turn/descent, it was after that when ATC asked him to follow it so he THEN turned around to try and find it again but had lost sight of it and it was too late because he noticed the smoke. But he was still too far away at that point to even know that the smoke was coming from the Pentagon until he got closer.

This is how he described it to us. Hope that helps.


OK, did O'Brien describe what type of "plane" it was?

What was O'Briens .ing when he first had visual contact?

Any guess on what flt. it was or who was piloting?




posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


When he made that statement days after the event details of the complex flight path were not known.

He was merely talking in general without knowing about the complete turn around and the low and level approach without hitting the lawn that was required. Bernard wouldn't have had time to study this information (that wasn't released yet anyway) and understand the complexity involved and the military precision with which it was carried out.

In fact he STILL may not know this information as most people don't bother analyzing these details but nobody was aware of them in the tumultuous and emotional weeks immediately following the event.

[edit on 6-9-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]

[edit on 6-9-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Sep, 6 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by infinityoreilly
 


O'brien did not state that he knew exactly what type of plane it was but it was certainly a twin engine passenger jet.

I don't believe it was any airline or was piloted by anyone.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I don't doubt that Bernard did not know all of the exact details of the Pentagon approach. That wasn't my point.

Conspiracy pushers always use Bernard's refusal to rent Hani a Cessna 172 as an example of how incompetent he was, but always fail to point out that Bernard also says that he has no doubt that Hani could have crashed into the building once the airliner got going.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   
lets just say for the benefit of the doubt ol' hani was a good pilot. decent skill level. lets just say he got a b+ or even a- in flight school.

many professional pilots say there is no way in hell they could pull off that move.

now it becomes a stretch to believe that he did it at best. John Lear said he couldn't do it with 19000+ hours of flight time. many pilots from pilotsfor911truth.org said they couldn't do it.

so to the people that believe hani did it, what leads you to your conclusion?



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


The investigations of the FBI, NTSB, FAA, CIA, NSA And the 9/11 Commission. That is, until someone else can come up with a better explanation.



posted on Sep, 7 2007 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by jprophet420
 


The investigations of the FBI, NTSB, FAA, CIA, NSA And the 9/11 Commission. That is, until someone else can come up with a better explanation.


in none of those reports does it cite that hani hanjour had more pilot skills than the people i mentioned.

could you quote to me from any of those reports a pilot that has flown a 7x7 claiming that the maneuver was possible? well, thats what it would require for me to believe that.

im not trying to disrespect your opinion whatsoever, i'm just kind of cloudy on the end conclusion.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I've been reading this thread with interest and would like to add some photos to get opinions on what people think this is.I'm not well versed in aircraft but have my own opinions.
The only manipulations I have done are with simple filters.I couldn't photoshop if my life depended on it.I used stills from the very short video and watched at least a hundred times to make sure I grabbed the object in question.
I couldn't find these posted anywhere at ATS.















[edit on 8-9-2007 by citizen truth]



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   
Looks like you got a tail and some wheels.

More like a race car going into the pentagon.

Optical filters of some kind, wave front or some such, might be able to

match up with the known optical signature of known planes.

This would cost quite a lot and no official government agency would

tell the truth since all evidence has been removed by the FBI

just like Tesla's lab and documents in 1943.

A sure sign of a crime, was Tesla killed?

Amen.



posted on Sep, 8 2007 @ 01:37 PM
link   

was Tesla killed?

No, but they tried. He died a poor man.



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   


could you quote to me from any of those reports a pilot that has flown a 7x7 claiming that the maneuver was possible? well, thats what it would require for me to believe that.
reply to post by jprophet420
 


Does it have to be from an official source, or can it be from an outside source? If you're interested I can post a couple of links.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 07:21 PM
link   
yes, sure. i was genuinely questioning what made you believe it. on one hand i doubt it will sway what i believe one way or another, but then how objective would it be say 'no, my mind is made up'?



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 08:27 PM
link   
reply to post by jprophet420
 


Here is an article from salon.com. It's a couple of pages long but worth the read.linked from wtc7lies.googlepages.com

This is a (PDF) rebuttal of an article by an airline pilot from an airline pilot. Also found at wtc7lies.googlepages.com



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jprophet420
could you quote to me from any of those reports a pilot that has flown a 7x7 claiming that the maneuver was possible? well, thats what it would require for me to believe that.

im not trying to disrespect your opinion whatsoever, i'm just kind of cloudy on the end conclusion.


I can't find it right now, and I'm only borrowing this computer, but there is a video in the aircraft videos thread, on one of the last two pages or so that I posted of a 757 doing a climb going straight up at an airshow. Would that help you believe that a 757 could do something like it did at the Pentagon?



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Zaph, i believe a 7x7 is capable of pretty amazing stuff. im not really questioning the plane, im questioning the pilot for the most part.

one of the main problems i have is that ATS' resident pilot John Lear claims that the pentagon would not be visible from the seat Hani was in.

another one of the huge problems is the FDR. Apparently, its not accurate and or consistant with itself, but all i have to go on is other peoples words.

Thank you both for respectfully posting 'evidence', i am reviewing the links now.

of course my main problem with the whole pentagon scenario is that it certainly is covered up. This leaves us to speculate what really happened all the way from the only conspiracy was to cover up sensitive info to 'satan did it'.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 10:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Boone 870
 


I screwed that last post up and it wouldn't let me edit. I'll just add to it here.


Another point that John brings up is that the pressure indicators were adjusted at 18,000 feet. Hani had twin-engine aircraft training and depending on the type, if it had turbine engines, there is a really good chance that he had flown over 18,000 feet and would have been trained to reset the altimeters at that altitude. I do not want to say for sure. I'm going to dig around for awhile to see if I can find out what type of aircraft he had trained on and I will post it here if I find anything.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit

was Tesla killed?

No, but they tried. He died a poor man.



Yeah and how long will it take the FBI to put a plane into all the other
security tapes.

Must be a low priority job or more difficult than the lousy fake TV
job on the Towers... they had expert people on that end.. jumping Israelis..

No jumping Israelis down at the Pentagon.. tooo bbbbaaaddd.

Shine a light on this conspiracy please...

Whos involved: Bin Laden, FBI



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
I done some more digging and found a link to the Zacharias Moussaoui trial exhibit and there is a photocopy of Hanis logbook and some jet tech records of his 737 simulator training. Document #'s are PX00021 and PX00021.1 (PDF)

His logbook and record say this....

255 hours total time
74.5 hours IFR (Instrument Flight Rules)
29.9 hours AMEL Turbine (Aircraft Multiengine Land)
12 hours B737-200 simulator time

I can't find what type of twin-engine turbine he had flown, so I can't say for sure if the aircraft that he flew was capable of going above 18,000 feet. He did fly a 737 simulator which means that there's a good chance that he was taught to reset the altimeter at 18,000 feet.

Remember that these records were recorded at 255 hours total time and that leaves almost 350 hours of flying for him to learn more.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT
 


I don't doubt that Bernard did not know all of the exact details of the Pentagon approach. That wasn't my point.

Conspiracy pushers always use Bernard's refusal to rent Hani a Cessna 172 as an example of how incompetent he was, but always fail to point out that Bernard also says that he has no doubt that Hani could have crashed into the building once the airliner got going.


Here's a queation then to help a little with this - you and Craig both know the timeline better - which statement of Bernard's came first? If he said "oh yeah sure" at first, but then when he heard all the details said "Hani? No way." This could mean something. Maybe. People read too much into a single clue all the time.

I'd gotten tired of hearing that one quote about what a bad pilot he was supposed to be I got sick of it. Even without other clues that he was a fine pilot, I was thinking he might have uniformly ACTED like a bad pilot to his American audience to sow confusion in advance of his precision piloting. If it turns out he really was an ace pilot, and as people (Mirafe of Deceit for one) have demonstrated the possibility of the maneuver he did is clearly possible for a good pilot, such doubts get weaker yet.

I'm not saying Hani WAS at the helm, there's just not as many good reasons to doubt it as some pretend. That includes finding the Pentagon.

Also Boone: good work finding those logs and thanks for a few month back turning me onto the full NTSB animation video. It's been immensely useful.


[edit on 11-9-2007 by Caustic Logic]



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
Double post


[edit on 11-9-2007 by Boone 870]



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join