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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.