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.

 

Pentagon flyover witnesses reported by Center for Military History

page: 10
11
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
The one thing I have noticed about all of CIT's threads is the re-occurrance of several members who seem hell-bent on disproving CIT's theories. One might even see it as some sort of 'gang-mentality' - they feed off each others enthusiasm to disprove CIT.

Now I consider myself to be a logical, intelligent person and I have to admit I see merit in the CIT investigation. It seems to me that these certain 'over-enthused' members overlook some of the more convincing evidence and try to nail down their argument by consistently hounding CIT and any other person who DARES to entertain the thought that perhaps CIT is right with the little tid-bits that they have successfully managed to disprove.

Sorry for the rant, just thought that needed to be said. Keep up the good work CIT





I for one think its high time certain detractors and anti CIT's should just be banned at this point.

they contribute nothing other than sarcasm and anything but healthy or sincere skepticism.

isn't it obvious to the mods?

even though i'm sure i'll be attacked and flamed for this opinion, What i'm suggesting isn't really raw censorship in this case... nor is it suppression of intelligent discourse since posters like cameron and his merry men have crossed what i call the line of logic, rationale and objective critical/respectful debate.


way too much bandwidth is being wasting going in circles with these individuals who deny facts and cointinually have zero evidence to support their claims and baseless assertions.

am i wrong?




posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Swing Dangler
 


So...let me see if I can get this right.
First, AA77 didn´t crash at the Pentagon, right?
But we have a Flight Data Recorder, right?
And that recorder proves to us that the plane was too high to be able to crash at the Pentagon, right?
Whose Data Recorder is that? AA77? Are we proving that AA77 flew over the Pentagon?
So then: What happened to AA77?
And specially: How can the perps, be SO STUPID as to provide recorder data that proves they are lairs???
Let me put it another way: If you had fired that “alleged missile” at the Pentagon, wouldn´t you put the recorder INSIDE IT, to record the correct parameters???
TALK ABOUT COMMON SENSE!!!



posted on Feb, 9 2009 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by matrixNIN11

Originally posted by Kryties
The one thing I have noticed about all of CIT's threads is the re-occurrance of several members who seem hell-bent on disproving CIT's theories. One might even see it as some sort of 'gang-mentality' - they feed off each others enthusiasm to disprove CIT.

Now I consider myself to be a logical, intelligent person and I have to admit I see merit in the CIT investigation. It seems to me that these certain 'over-enthused' members overlook some of the more convincing evidence and try to nail down their argument by consistently hounding CIT and any other person who DARES to entertain the thought that perhaps CIT is right with the little tid-bits that they have successfully managed to disprove.

Sorry for the rant, just thought that needed to be said. Keep up the good work CIT





I for one think its high time certain detractors and anti CIT's should just be banned at this point.

they contribute nothing other than sarcasm and anything but healthy or sincere skepticism.

isn't it obvious to the mods?

even though i'm sure i'll be attacked and flamed for this opinion, What i'm suggesting isn't really raw censorship in this case... nor is it suppression of intelligent discourse since posters like cameron and his merry men have crossed what i call the line of logic, rationale and objective critical/respectful debate.


way too much bandwidth is being wasting going in circles with these individuals who deny facts and cointinually have zero evidence to support their claims and baseless assertions.

am i wrong?




Of course you're not wrong matrix.

In fact you and Kryties are spot on with your wise observations.

Thanks both of you for the sorely needed honesty.



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
Missing? Really? Because a fist full of conspiracy theorists wants S/N's you call them missing?

Did you ever read the data from the FDR from flight 77? It actually has the information of the flight on 9/11 AND the previous flight. Why would it be necessary for the S/N to be there? It was shown above that not ALL FDR S/N's are recorded.

Really Cameron? Have you got a source and link for that "previous flight" FDR data for American flight 77? I have downloaded and reviewed "AAL77_tabular.csv" files from both J. Farmer's old website and from the Pilots' page.

As near as I could tell, the first column of the early data from either reads:


# American Airlines Flight 77 Pentagon
# 9/11/01 Boeing 757 N644AA
# Revision: January 28 2002 January 29 2002
# National Transportation Safety Board
# Date Printed: January 29 2002

# American Airlines Flight 77 Pentagon 9/11/01 Boeing 757 N644AA
# Revision: January 28 2002 January 29 2002 National Transportation Safety Board
# Date Printed: January 29 2002
Eastern
Daylight
Time
(hh:mm:ss)
8:19:00

They both had the same filename, but the Pilots' file had an earlier date IIRC. The date on the J. Farmer file (from "aal77.ual93.ntsb.records.iso" was 24 Oct 2007 12:02:26, and the file was 19,618,136 bytes (or 19159KB according to my computer).

The Pilots' file was dated 29 Jan 2002 10:10:20 and was also 19,618,136 bytes.

Thank you again in advance,

RH

On the serial numbers and NTSB issues, people may want to review the FOIA work of Aidan Monaghan at 911blogger.

Serial numbers absent

More FOIA and NTSB info



posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by PplVSNWO

This thread is not about all of those other things, there are already mountains of threads discussing those topics.


I am responding to post from Mr. CIT. I agree though. Too many threads dealing with the same stuff.
[snip]
I will have to disagree with you. There are no flyover witnesses. This was a statement by a man who states what he said some others were saying.

en.wikipedia.org...



Negative proof, the fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative, is a logical fallacy of the following form: "X is true because there is no proof that X is false." It is asserted that a proposition is true, only because it has not been proven false. The negative proof fallacy often occurs in the debate of the existence of supernatural phenomena, in the following form: "A supernatural force must exist, because there is no proof that it does not exist". However, the fallacy can also occur when the predicate of a subject is denied: "Religious people haven't been able to produce conclusive evidence to support the existence of a "God", therefore such a being must not exist."


en.wikipedia.org...



The argument from ignorance, also known as argumentum ad ignorantiam ("appeal to ignorance" [1]) or argument by lack of imagination, is a logical fallacy in which it is claimed that a premise is true only because it has not been proven false or is false only because it has not been proven true.

And which man stated which others said what again?



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by rush969
Originally posted by Swing Dangler (SD)

(SD)"""The 'official evidence is precisely what has given rise to private
investigations!! Don't you get it?"""

And are you not able to grasp that the first OBVIOUS thing that all the people involved in this GIANT conspiracy would have to do is to make sure ALL THE EVIDENCE would perfectly MATCH THE OFFICIAL STORY???!!!

(SD)"""For example, you must be forced to believe that the plane flew over the Pentagon and over the light poles because the Flight Data Recorder from the plane says it was too high to impact! Welcome to the fly over club as started by the flight data recorder itself."""

Isn´t it OBVIOUS to you that IF there had been a flyover, the parties involved would NOT HAVE let this information be known???!!!
Would you be so dumb as to provide the information that shows you have lied and are guilty of multiple homicide and treason to your Country?

(SD)"""No explosive sounds? Now your calling firefighters, first responders, victims liars, those who first reported explosives going off were you guess it, the mainstream media...CNN, FOX, etc, before the propaganda machine set in."""
They were the first ones who reported it and now you want to play debunker historical revisionist by stating "conspiracy theorists" started this??

WASN´T MAINSTREAM MEDIA IN ON IT??? Make up your minds please.
Of course that phrase "before the propaganda machine set in" makes it all good doesn´t it. PLLEEAASE!!!



[edit on 26-1-2009 by rush969]

[edit on 26-1-2009 by rush969]

1. The perfect being didn't cause this crime, humankind did. To think humans are infalliable when committing crimes is to ignore reality. In your mind and this line of logic, the conspiracy can only be factual if no evidence is uncovered to prove otherwise. An arguement fallacy by the way and a bit circular.

2. Rush (love the band) the Flight Data Recorder from the alleged plane PROVE a fly over. PROVE the plane was to high to hit light poles let alone the Pentagon. What you need to do is figure out why? I don't care about your "perfect criminal fallacy" it makes no sense. Your contiuned major assumption is that everyone who is anyone is involved with the crime thereby the release of evidence proving the crime would NEVER be released by the criminals. However, the release of contradictory evidence proves your assumption wrong. Apparently not everyone was involved in the crime because evidence has come forth!! Gotcha!

3. The media is not a monolithic giant controlled by a single puppet. I'm sure you understand the structure of the mainstream media today, the corporate ownership, interchangeable board members, etc, etc.

What you should do is review the live reports from the day. It was those reports that started the CD view, etc. Generally the MSM takes care of the cover by the fallacy of omission for the most part. Becareful when you argue ALL media was in on it. Yet another fallacy.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Swing Dangler

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Swing Dangler
 


not when you have the entire aircraft entering the building. The tail goes in after, then don't forget the partial collapse of the front of the affected area. The velocity of the black box will still be the same as the aircraft's initial velocity at impact. So it will still move forward anyways.
And again, we have no explanation how the 757 debris ended up inside the Pentagon to begin with and how CIT explains how people managed to "plant" everything in front of hundreds of commuters, eyewitnesses, search & rescue teams, TV crews, first responders, etc, without anyone noticing. This is another untied string in the CIT "Flyover" fantasy.


One, the tail would have been sheered off on impact but no tail debris can be found. Really? You looked? How do you prove a statement like that?

It certainly didn't enter the building because where the tail should have been, no identation marks of any sort can be found. The building was made of silly putty?

So your suggesting then the FDR did not suffer a loss of velocity upon impact? In violation of physics, correct?
We already know there are conflicting accounts about who discovered the FDR and where they discovered it. Not only that, you claim the "flyover" is a fantasy, but YOU MUST ACCEPT IF YOU ACCEPT THE ALLEGED OFFICIAL FDR. The official FDR has the plane too high to hit the light poles and too high to hit the Pentagon.
There is no way around it. Your caught accepting official evidence that proves the OCT wrong.

Secondly, you can read several accounts about anonymous individuals and 'fake' firefighters on the scene at the Pentagon. No one has any clue what they were doing there and they were all acting very strangely.
So as far as planting evidence, all these people are immediately suspect. So you contend that it was possible for people to sneak around and plant plane and body parts without anyone noticing and your proof of this "theory" is that people were seen doing this?
You can read more here:Imposters at the Pentagon

Independent contractors were operating in the area at the time, all of who would be suspect. As far as planting parts, its not that difficult in an emergency such as that.


1. First you identify the plane parts and match them with serial numbers. Second you look for physical damage created by the tail's impact. Neither can be viewed. Ooops strike 1 and 2.

2. Of course the building wasn't silly putty. But if you were to view an animation you might think otherwise. It hast he tail entering the buildng in tact. Secondly, if you accept the OS, then you accept that the fueslage created a hole in the front of the buildng and at exit. Yet the tail made of the same materials doesn't create any impact mark where it should have.

3. Body parts? There were enough victims killed by the explosion so as not to require the planting of body parts. The only thing that needed to be planted is the FDR. And with the conflicting stories about its discovery and location, that becomes very easy. Especially with 'fake' firefighters and unknown "soldiers" wandering around the area, it becomes quite easy.
Start thinking like a criminal, like criminal investigtaors do, and all of these impossibles become possible and probable.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by rush969
reply to post by Swing Dangler
 


So...let me see if I can get this right.
First, AA77 didn´t crash at the Pentagon, right?
But we have a Flight Data Recorder, right?
And that recorder proves to us that the plane was too high to be able to crash at the Pentagon, right?
Whose Data Recorder is that? AA77? Are we proving that AA77 flew over the Pentagon?
So then: What happened to AA77?
And specially: How can the perps, be SO STUPID as to provide recorder data that proves they are lairs???
Let me put it another way: If you had fired that “alleged missile” at the Pentagon, wouldn´t you put the recorder INSIDE IT, to record the correct parameters???
TALK ABOUT COMMON SENSE!!!


1. Correct. There is no factual evidence Flight 77 hit the 'gon. What happened to Flight 77? Great question! Let me know when you have evidence supporting your answer. What do you think PFT and CIT have been getting at all this time?

2. We have a flight recorder that allegedly came from Flight 77. Correct. The altitude shows the plane too high to hit the lamp poles and the Pentagon. The eyewitnesses place the plane on th

3. We have no idea whose FDR it is. The OS states its from Flight 77. But there is no serial number evidence to prove one way or another, only official declarations. Whose FDR is it anyway? Great freaking question!!! When asked about the descrepensies, the NTSB passes the buck to the FBI who took immedite control of the entire scene and evidence. Guess what the FBI response is? Nothing. No Comment. No Explanation. No Acklowedgement.

4. Your final point, how stupid can they be? Great question. Who says someone didn't leave the error in on purpose in an act of blowing the whistle? That'd be pretty smart.

Who would have expected several years after the attacks, a group of strangers with a common interest (pilots) would band together in common interest to begin an independent investigation.
And what criminal mastermind would ever have thought that a FOIA request would result in the release of the data to a group of guys that had to go through quite a bit of 'clandestine' movements and discussions to get the hardware to decode the data?

Now if they had been truly smart bad guys, they would have claimed the box was never found, but hard to do in such a small environement compared to say the WTC complex. The sheeple will buy the loss of blackboxes after 2 planes hit two towers and 3 collapsed buildings later the boxes would be lost or destroyed. Although there is some eyewitness accounts they were discovered and turned over to guess who? The FBI! Imagine that. It is hard to claim a lost or destroyed box at the Pentagon. Too small of an area, lack of collapsing towers, etc.

Common sense? LOL Common sense states the warnings would have been heeded prior to the attack to prevent,but they weren't. Common sense states the planes would have been intercepted. They weren't. Common sense states you dont' have to lie to an investigative body. NORAD did. Common sense says one story suffices to explain everything. It wasn't. It changed many times. Common sense states you testify under oath with nothing to hide. Bush and Cheney didn't. Common sense states you tell the truth about the air quality at ground zero. They didn't. Common sense states there were WMD's in Iraq. There were none.

We aren't dealing with common sense, we are dealing with a small group of individuals that conspired to attack American interests to justify imperial expansion in South West Asia, whose ultimate goal is the encirclement and eventual control of the strategic natural resources in the region. By doing so it prevents Chinese and Russian expansion into the region as well as a buffer between Islamic countries and Israel. Governments have staged false flag attacks thoughout history for ulterior motives. 9/11 was no different.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by SPreston


However, on 9-11 we had 4 US aircraft missing serial numbers for 8 black boxes,


Missing? Really? Because a fist full of conspiracy theorists wants S/N's you call them missing?

Did you ever read the data from the FDR from flight 77? It actually has the information of the flight on 9/11 AND the previous flight. Why would it be necessary for the S/N to be there? It was shown above that not ALL FDR S/N's are recorded.


Hey, Cam, welcome to the Fly Over Club as provided to you by Flight 77's alleged FDR! The FDR that shows the plane too high to hit light poles and too high to hit the Pentagon. Interesting predicament your in now, eh?



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swing Dangler



Now if they had been truly smart bad guys, they would have claimed the box was never found, but hard to do in such a small environement compared to say the WTC complex.
Although there is some eyewitness accounts they were discovered and turned over to guess who? The FBI! Imagine that. It is hard to claim a lost or destroyed box at the Pentagon. Too small of an area, lack of collapsing towers, etc.


This statement caught my attention. "Hard to claim the box was never found (or destroyed for that matter), in such a small environment"!!!!

Yet, what actually happened was that the recorder was planted, along with damaged airplane parts, charred human remains, and some belongings of people who were passengers of AA77 on that day.

That´s not hard to do, right?!!!

And that phrase, """if they had been truly smart bad guys""".

What does that mean?

Are you claiming that the FBI are the bad guys, and that they are dumb as bad guys?

The FBI is part of the conspiracy behind 9/11, but they don´t have intelligent enough special agents to carry out such a simple task as figuring out that the FDR should NOT BE discovered or read?

REALLY???


[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]

[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   

posted by rush969

The FBI is part of the conspiracy behind 9/11, but they don´t have intelligent enough special agents to carry out such a simple task as figuring out that the FDR should NOT BE discovered or read?
REALLY???


Perhaps none of the 'special agents' knew how to decipher (decode) the Flight Data Recorder. Perhaps an agent was just handed the FDR by a mystery person and ordered to plant it where he thought best. So he dropped it on his own sooty footprints out by the Exit Hole, not realizing the FDR was showing much too high an altitude.

Image taken from US Defense Department official Pentagon 9-11 Book



Maybe that mystery person was not his friend and was slyly on the other side, tricking that 'special agent' into doing what he should not. Perhaps that 'special agent' is pushing up daisies somewhere as a reward.

UhhOhhh!! Much much much too high. Somebody goofed.





[edit on 2/28/09 by SPreston]



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Perhaps none of the 'special agents' knew how to decipher (decode) the Flight Data Recorder. Perhaps an agent was just handed the FDR by a mystery person and ordered to plant it where he thought best. So he dropped it on his own sooty footprints out by the Exit Hole, not realizing the FDR was showing much too high an altitude.

Maybe that mystery person was not his friend and was slyly on the other side, tricking that 'special agent' into doing what he should not. Perhaps that 'special agent' is pushing up daisies somewhere as a reward.

UhhOhhh!! Much much much too high. Somebody goofed.

[edit on 2/28/09 by SPreston]


PERHAPS...PERHAPS...PERHAPS...MAYBE...MAYBE...
Speculation...Speculation...Speculation.

I guess in the "conspiracy theory world" ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE. One can speculate all he wants and it´s OK.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Posted by Swing Dangler:
Hey, Cam, welcome to the Fly Over Club as provided to you by Flight 77's alleged FDR! The FDR that shows the plane too high to hit light poles and too high to hit the Pentagon. Interesting predicament your in now, eh?

How can you say that AA77 was too high to hit the light poles and the Pentagon, and claim that this is shown by reading the FDR that was found in the wreackage inside the Pentagon???!!!

The FDR found in the Pentagon SHOWS THAT AA77 CRASHED THERE!!!

If the readout didn´t match exactly with what was expected, then something happened to the recorder, or the way it worked those few seconds, or is missing some data, but that´s another issue.



[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]



posted on Mar, 3 2009 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by rush969
Posted by Swing Dangler:
Hey, Cam, welcome to the Fly Over Club as provided to you by Flight 77's alleged FDR! The FDR that shows the plane too high to hit light poles and too high to hit the Pentagon. Interesting predicament your in now, eh?

How can you say that AA77 was too high to hit the light poles and the Pentagon, and claim that this is shown by reading the FDR that was found in the wreackage inside the Pentagon???!!!

The FDR found in the Pentagon SHOWS THAT AA77 CRASHED THERE!!!

If the readout didn´t match exactly with what was expected, then something happened to the recorder, or the way it worked those few seconds, or is missing some data, but that´s another issue.

[edit on 28-2-2009 by rush969]
Rush, you have to understand, I'm not saying the plane was too high to hit the Pentagon and lightpoles, the FDR is!

Your next question should ask why does it say that and if it were too high by the data how did it get into the Pentagon.
Answer: the FDR was planted. Ever wonder why no serial numbers have been forth coming or no videos other than the 2 released by the Pentagon that doesn't show a plane and does show manipulation of the video?
Earlier in this thread we discussed fake firefighters and unknown individuals in the Pentagon right after the attack which you need in order to plant evidence.
We've discussed the multiple locations where the alleged FDR was found. There should not be multiple locations in the official story.
We've discussed how the FDR made it through the entire crash scene out to the exit hole which is very improbable and most likely impossible. Physics anyone? The tail section is obliterated upon the alleged impact yet somehow the FDR in the rear of the plane makes it all the way through to the punch out hole?
There have been photographs shown to you of the FDR being on top of footprints where it was found. Strange. Or did they find it, pick it up, carry it to another spot, place it on the ground, photograph it and then lie about the location of its discovery?

The FDR has been analyzed to death by Pilots for 9/11 Truth. It isn't missing data, there are no errors, etc. Don't you think when asked by the organization,Pilots, the NTSB or the FBI would have simply said, "Ahh it was an error in the recorder or there is missing time, etc." No, they ignore the question and pass the buck to the FBI. They have no explanation because the only explanation suggests a fly over and planted evidence. Perhaps the NTSB employees were told not to address any questions and refer all to the FBI. Who knows?? The point is 13 people or more place the plane North of the Citgo gas station thereby contradicting the entire fight path all together.







 
11
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join