CNN airs story about the Mystery Jet over Washington on 911 today 12/1/07

Andrews and Reagan are far enough apart that they won't interfere with each other when operating. It's when you have two radars that are very close together, and close in frequency that they can interfere with each other. The USN in Pearl Harbor and the USCG at Sand Island would have to coordinate with the Honolulu airport before they could operate their radars at any significant power, because they were known to cause interference with the HNL radar.

reply to post by Boone 870


Our discussion has been off topic in this thread.

Feel free to continue it in the relevant thread here

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


Agreed.



Does the above image work now?

Double post

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Boone 870]

[edit on 7-12-2007 by Boone 870]

reply to post by Boone 870


No and those download pop ups are not cool.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


Sorry about the pop-ups. I clicked the alert button for moderator help and I'm waiting for a reply. How come over to the other thread once I figure out how to upload images.

Originally posted by CyberTruth
reply to post by jthomas

 

You still continue to argue around my central talking point.

How about a clear photo or video??? What is up with that?? The Government has absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by showing us a picture. This is the damn Pentagon we are talking about.

No, I answered you directly. The point is you cannot even claim there are photos or videos that show AA77 hitting the Pentagon and none are needed at all to know that AA77 hit the Pentagon.

So please explain what the problem is with that?

Originally posted by citizen truth
reply to post by jthomas

The evidence(not proof) is heresay,that being AA77 hitting the Pentagon.
So far I've seen pictures of some shiny metal scraps,ONE wheel,ONE questionable engine part,ONE questionable landing gear piece, and ONE picture with a charred body in a seat.

Here is what you need to think about:

1) We have only a couple of dozen eyewitness reports available to us and the majority are consistent with AA77 hitting the Pentagon and with the other evidence. Importantly, however, is that we have hundreds of other witnesses that were involved with the firefighting, rescue, and recovery efforts that we haven't heard from. The fact that they exist is relevant. The fact that we have not heard from them implies nothing but suggests the implausibility of every one of them being quiet if AA77 did not hit the Pentagon.

2) The same goes for existing photos you've seen. You cannot assume that something does not exist because you haven't seen a photo of it or one isn't published on the internet, so drawing a conclusion from that fact is fallacious.

3) If you doubt that AA77 it the Pentagon, you must provide a plausible explanation for what happened to it and what hit the Pentagon consistent with all of the other evidence. I note that from the very beginning of 9/11 conspiracy theories, 9/11 "researchers" have avoided all responsibility for demonstrating that.

So you would have a hard time claiming the evidence is hearsay without doing all the research and getting all the information. To date, I have seen no one bother to interview the hundreds of people who saw the wreckage in the Pentagon. Even Craig Ranke avoided doing that.

Originally posted by eyewitness86
It staggers the sound mind to believe that some people still insist that a huge passenger jet hit the Pentagon on 9-11.

Do you believe AA77 existed as a regularly scheduled flight on 9/11/2001?