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.

 

So What About These Pentagon Photos?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


Are you talking about this thread?

forums.randi.org...

In post #291 this guy states:


MOD5537 is the company part number for a power supply for the emergency lights on a 757.


forums.randi.org...

Can anyone here confirm that? But better yet, can anyone confirm that it was from Flight 77?

[edit on Sun Jun 28th 2009 by TrueAmerican]




posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Several pilots and AA maintenence personnel comment in the JREF thread. Pretty informative if you are willing to handle reality.

How many of them proved that alleged part was from the alleged Flight AA77?



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Can't argue with that...but, still....how did it get mangled?

Ever hear about the little four-year old girl in Detroit? Only survivor, NorthWest Airlines, 1987. Odd things can happen, in crashes.

Ed. AND her S/N was intact.....







Oh, I Am So Glad you mentioned this in this thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It was either August 1988, or 1989. I can verify this by my records if it is that important to anyone.

Well, I had an interview with Chrysler through some good friends and drove home to MI, which I was living in NC at the time.

So I met with my good friends Dad, which was the person interviewing me. His office was attached to the smaller airport located outside of Detroit. I forgot the name(Willow R?), as I said, if it is this important to the naysayers I can confirm it by looking back in my old daily planners.

Well, on a nice warm summer day, I was given a tour of a couple hangers and the planes residing in them and such.

My friend's Dad proceeded to show me the plane reconstruction of the Northwest Airliner that crashed in 1987. We were at the top floor on this balcony overlooking the whole hanger, and below us, left of our balcony was the plane that crashed.

Looking down at the reconstruction, every piece of the plane that could be recovered, even if it was smaller than a finger nail, it was there. There were walls(black, covered in black plastic!?) built up around the floor area of the plane, so no one could see it or had access to it.

To the chase;

The plane was charred, but Virtually Complete. Meaning, if you saw this from a great distance, you would know this was a commercial airliner, at one time. They don't glue it back together, but everything is laid out in the correct place and position as if the plane is resting in a hanger waiting for the next flight.

This may be a low estimate, I would say, 70% of it was there.

The other point;

You could absolutely distinguish the parts, engines and many of the small parts as a commercial airliner. No matter how burned up it was. It was cooked pretty well.

Miracles do come out of tragedy, like this for example, though, 95% of plane parts just don't vanish, burn up, get crushed into nano particles. There will be plenty of evidence left.



It was very shocking seeing it! I will never forget it.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


Are you talking about this thread?

forums.randi.org...

In post #291 this guy states:


MOD5537 is the company part number for a power supply for the emergency lights on a 757.


forums.randi.org...


Yeah, that's the thread. So you knew about this, but are just now to the point of trying to discuss it?


Can anyone here confirm that? But better yet, can anyone confirm that it was from Flight 77?


Why would anyone need to? Do you need MORE confirmation that flt 77 crashed at the Pentagon?

Naw, who needs all that when you can just trust THIS guy----->



Tell me "True American" why would you believe this French bookpeddling radical over the words and footage of 1000's of True Americans?

You DO know that Thierry Meyssan concocted this whole flight 77 no-planer story ...RIGHT?



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Why would anyone need to? Do you need MORE confirmation that flt 77 crashed at the Pentagon?

Thanks for that.

Your inability to answer the question shows very clearly, how weak your position is with regards to the image in the OP.

You have not been able to prove that alleged part was from the alleged Flight AA77.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by PRS395
 


YES! That's what they do when there's a fatal accident and they want to determine the cause.

BUT...NorthWest in Detroit and AAL77 at the Pentagon have nothing in common.

AND I've already pointed out that aluminum melts in fire.

NW255 crashed on take off. Slow speed, under 200 knots, max.

Ed: BTW, how do you know that every part in that hangar used to re-construct the plane was from NW255??? Hmmm??? Where's the "Chain of Custody"?

It was near the airport, maybe someone from NorthWest's maintenance hangars ran over and planted mangled parts, to throw everyone off and start a conspiracy!

~just a bit o' sarcasm, mate~

This is ATS, after all...

[edit on 6/28/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Symbiote
 


Except it wasnt Mohammed Atta's passport that was found, it was Satam al Suqami's......and it was found by a passerby, prior to the collapse of the towers.

www.9-11commission.gov...

Footnote 109.

Why is it so hard to accept that a passport could survive a plane crash? I mean WORMS in an experiment on board the Shuttle Columbia survived the breakup, reentry and fall to earth....



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Why would anyone need to? Do you need MORE confirmation that flt 77 crashed at the Pentagon?

Thanks for that.

Your inability to answer the question shows very clearly, how weak your position is with regards to the image in the OP.

You have not been able to prove that alleged part was from the alleged Flight AA77.


Can you prove that Thierry Masson's theory was correct?

Any red flags there?

Like I said the part is likely from an American Airlines 757. You have read and seen where the part was in the aircraft originally. As to what aircraft --parts aren't labled like that.

Think about your car... Would your Headlight also have your VIN inscribed on it? How about your back bumper?

No?

It would have an OEM part number though. for replacement/ repair purposes.

I doubt you will be able to match that photo to flt 77 without deductive reasoning.

I just find the double standard in "acceptable evidence" amongst "believers" quite humorous.

Meysson's diatribe is gospel, but there needs to be a staunch micro-validation of some random emergency light..heh.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Yeah, that's the thread. So you knew about this, but are just now to the point of trying to discuss it?


No, as I said in the OP, I had not seen that particular photo before. I have seen a lot, yes, but I surely do not claim to have seen it all. I can't imagine anyone has- it's so big a subject, with literally millions of pages on the internet written about it. And thanks to your lead, I went and searched for that number MOD5337 on google- and that JREF thread came up. So that's how I found it.


Why would anyone need to? Do you need MORE confirmation that flt 77 crashed at the Pentagon?


A good detective relies on hard evidence my friend. While I don't claim to be one, I can at least try. And so far from what I have found, whoever made that statement about it being a power supply for emergency lights is lying out their butt.

This is an example of a power supply for the emergency lights on a 757:
www.radiantpowercorp.com...



1) Where do you see anything handwritten that even remotely resembles the pic in the OP?
2) Does American Airlines manufacture emergency power supplies? Or does Boeing?

Something is not adding up here, as is usual with so many other things about 9/11.

And woah woah woah... I never said a thing about no planers. Please don't tell me you are going to be another one of these people who can't stick to the subject matter at hand? I saw a picture, it was curious to me, and I am here to ask questions and get opinions ABOUT THE PICTURE. Not about no planers.

And btw, if there is a thread on ATS specifically dealing with this picture, someone please link me, and I will ask the mods to shut this thread down.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Yeah there was a thread here on it..I can't remember the title though.. I think Craig or Aldo was trying to disqualify the photo due to the grass.. as one of them had mowed lawns in the past.

At this point I just remember the funny stuff.

Please read that thread over there..it explains some of your questions

The parts are made by Boeing.. the actual servicing is done by American Airlines after purchase.

There are diagrams that show the part. Not sure exactly which one it is but it is a light housing... I am going strictly on recolection. I haven't read that thread since it was being discussed.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Absolutely Correct. There is No Hard Evidence To Suggest This Piece Of Wreckage Is From Flight 77. However As We All Know, There is Hard Evidence From CNN & Other News Networks Showing Very Clear Pictures/Video of The Pentagon Damage/Fires Before The Roof Collapsed & After. There is no Hard Evidence of Flight 77's Tail & Wing Damage to the Pentagon.

Can any one on here show us Hard Evidence of what is left of the Wings Of Flight 77?

These Pictures/Video Show The Pentagon Lawn Clearly as well, including the firefighters. A couple of these Fire Fighters were going to speak up on what they saw on Radio, but they canceled at the last minute & the radio station in question were told by their superiors that the couple of firefighters were on indefinite leave.

We All Know They Only Showed It Once On TV & wont release the rights, but it all has been investigated properly & showed many times on the SBS TV Network Station In Australia.

In Plane Sight, Again & Again.

Something Did Hit The Pentagon, But It Sure Wasn't Flight 77.


[edit on 28-6-2009 by Skyline666]



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:10 PM
link   
So what hit the Pentagon?

Is it a coincidence that American Airlines lost one Flt 77 that day being tracked on radar in Washington?

Why were the FDR and CVR found in the pentagon?

Why were there 100's of eye witnesses seeing a silver plane flying into the Pentagon?

After the fires were extinguished why were there 757 engines in the Pentagon?

Why was there Landing gear from a 757 in the Pentagon?

Why was there a tiny shard of metal with American Airlines markings being associated with the Pentagon crash?

NAW, Thierry Meysson doesn't believe there was a plane at the Pentagon...that's good enough..right?



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Like I said the part is likely from an American Airlines 757.

So...? Was it from the alleged Flight AA77, tail number N644AA???


Originally posted by Taxi-Driver
Think about your car...

Why would I entertain your off topic ramblings? This thread is about two images of the alleged parts from the alleged Flight AA77.

Instead of thinking about a car, why don't you think about how you're going to prove that alleged wreckage belongs to the alleged Flight AA77.

You always have the more honest option to simply admit that you can't prove that piece of wreckage belonged to the alleged Flight AA77. In the long run, it might save you a lot of hassles and worry, by falling short on your claims.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


TD, PLEASE. Why are you taking this so off topic? Where has anyone brought that guy up in here except for you? This is about a pic or two, and since ww provided some decent information on the second pic, I am now concentrating on the first pic. You still have not shown me the thread that you say specifically deals with this first pic in the OP. Can we stick with the subject please? Sheesh, it's like pulling teeth around here sometimes.



posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Taxi-Driver
 


TD, I'm Not Going To Go Off Topic With You Or Anyone Else On This Thread.

Why Don't You Show Us The Thread Describing The First Photo?

The Fact Is There Is No Hard Scientific Evidence To Prove That Piece OF Wreckage Is Part OF Flight 77.

I Will Gladly Challenge Anyone, To Produce This Hard Evidence Regarding This Photo, & even the photos that are said to prove the existence of Flight 77's 757 Engines.

P.S Dont Bring Up Thierry Meysson & His Book Again Either, I am Not A No Plane'r.

Cheers.

[edit on 28-6-2009 by Skyline666]

[edit on 28-6-2009 by Skyline666]



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


just a question...

can you conclusively prove that the part didn't come from f77 ???

i would see that as a more logical question to ask rather than - 'can any one prove that it did'.

so CAN any one conclusively prove that the part did not come from f77 ?



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by optyk phyba
can you conclusively prove that the part didn't come from f77 ???
i would see that as a more logical question to ask rather than - 'can any one prove that it did'.
so CAN any one conclusively prove that the part did not come from f77 ?

It's not required to prove a negative.

The burden of proof is upon the people who claim that these parts are from the alleged Flight AA77.

If you want someone to believe your claim, then you must be prepared to prove it. Expecting someone to believe you, just because, doesn't cut it from a logical point of view.

Reheat agrees with me, as he has stated that claims need to be proven.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


sorry no.
the burden of proof is on those who claim that the part did not come from f77.
they need to prove that it could not have possibly come from that plane, which they haven't.
you don't have to believe that f77 hit the pentagon, but if you claim that it didn't then i will ask you to conclusively prove it. and keep it simple.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by optyk phyba
sorry no.
the burden of proof is on those who claim that the part did not come from f77.

Given your relative inexperience on ATS and the 9/11 forum, I can understand why you might be a little confused with regards to burden of proof.

Clearly, you are mistaken. People making claims, need to provide evidence to support their claims. I'm not sure why you're prepared to believe that an unsourced picture of scrap wreckage did belong to the alleged Flight AA77... you're free to believe whatever you wish.

I won't respond to the rest of your post, it's not worth it. I can see that you don't have a clue why your logic is flawed and until you gain this understanding, you'll probably continue to bleat your false proposition as though it is valid.

Thanks for your contribution though! Stick around, I'm sure you'll learn lots more.



posted on Jun, 29 2009 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
SO...adding up....totals 188,375! The actual numbers are in the American Airlines database somewhere. ALL weight & balance computations are computerized, nowadays (and then too).


Just for the record:

The 757-200 takeoff weights range from 220,000 pounds (99,800 kilograms) up to a maximum of 255,000 pounds (115,660 kilograms) for greater payload or range. A freighter configuration of the 757-200 also is available.

That's from Boeing's own website.

Also note:
Final assembly of the 757-200 and the 757 Freighter is done in the Renton plant. Parts and assemblies for the airplanes are provided by Boeing plants in Auburn and Spokane, Wash.; Portland, Ore.; and Wichita, Kan., as well as by nearly 700 external suppliers.

That's a lot of external suppliers. And curiously, this page at Radiant Power states:


Radiant Power Corporation is the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). Our spare batteries and battery packs for emergency egress lighting systems are designed by the same engineers that designed the cell charger itself. Be assured, they will be ready to perform as intended by the airframer.


www.radiantpowercorp.com...

So the next obvious question would be if Radiant is the OEM of this part, then what in the heck is a written in, AA sticker doing on it? Now do you see why I don't trust what those people over at JREF are talking about? Granted, the guy could be right, and it could be a maintenance update or something... It just smells fishy. But yeah, I could be wrong.

As to proving this part did NOT come from AAF77, it would be simple if they would just verify it. But of course we all know what happens when one attempts to call Boeing...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join