Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Do you suffer from NADS?

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:04 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 02:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 



Goodnight. And I am the one doing personal attack now am I?
Look me up when you can provide something more than hearsay.
Considering I am not the one actively trying to buck a request for verifiable facts not just accepting statements of fact from the person making the claim.


Your desperate attempts to SHUT ME UP has failed you miserably, and for the proof that YOU have asked for regarding my factual, credible, findings that you so desperately would like to go away are right here. So enjoy your new reading material as you will find it is not hearsay information but a proven fact. Goodnight to you.



United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
12/22/07
PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
Contact: Robert Balsamo
e-mail: pilots@pilotsfor911truth.org
UNITED 93 DATA PROVIDED BY US GOVERNMENT DOES NOT SUPPORT OBSERVED EVENTS
Pilots for 9/11 Truth, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) via the Freedom of Information Act to obtain United Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder information, consisting of a Comma Separated Value (CSV) file and Flight Path Animation, allegedly derived from Flight 93 Flight Data Recorder (FDR). The data provided by the NTSB contradict observed events in several significant ways:
1. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support observations.
2. All Altitude data on the northern approach contradicts witnesses published by the New York Times.
3. Witness observations of approach path contradict northern approach as described by Popular Mechanics and the US Govt. Several witnesses observed the aircraft approaching from southeast over Indian Lake and from the south prior to witnessing explosion. Parts found in New Baltimore, 8 miles southeast of crater is a direct contradiction to the northern approach claimed by the US Govt.
4. Environmental Protection Agency reports no soil contamination of jet fuel after testing 5,000-6,000 yards of earth including 3 ground wells. Smoke plume photographed by a witness does not suggest a jet fuel rich explosion.
5. Impact angle according to Flight Data Recorder does not support an almost vertical impact as the govt story and crater suggests.
In May, 2007, members of Pilots for 9/11 Truth received these documents from the NTSB and began a close analysis of the data they contain. After expert review and cross check, Pilots for 9/11 Truth has concluded that the information in these NTSB documents does not support, and in some instances factually contradicts, the official government position that United Airlines Flight 93 created the impact crater as reported, in Somerset County, PA on the morning of September 11, 2001 .According to the US Govt, United Airlines Flight 93 approached Somerset County from the North-Northwest at a high altitude on the morning of September 11, 2001 . However, many witnesses contradict altitude as well as approach path. Also according to reports, and as the impact crater suggests, United Airlines Flight 93 impacted terrain at an almost vertical 90 degree angle, while the Flight Data Recorder shows a 35 degree angle with up-sloping terrain, further reducing impact angle.
The information provided by the US Government does not support reports of United Airlines Flight 93 approach, impact angles, and lack of jet fuel at Somerset Country, PA.
Pilots for 9/11 Truth is committed to discovering the truth surrounding the events of September 11, 2001 . We have contacted both the NTSB and the FBI regarding these and other inconsistencies. To date, they have refused to comment on, correct, refute, retract or offer side-letters that might explain the discrepancies between what they claim are the data extracted from the FDR of United Flight 93 and the events observed. .As concerned citizens and professionals in the aviation industry, Pilots for 9/11 Truth asks, why have these discrepancies not been addressed by agencies within the United States Government? Pilots for 9/11 Truth takes the position that an official government inquiry into these discrepancies is warranted and long overdue. We call upon our fellow citizens to write to their Congressional representatives to inform them of these discrepancies and call for an immediate investigation into this matter. For more information and in depth analysis please visit pilotsfor911truth.org.

pilotsfor911truth.org...



National Transportation Safety Board PDF Documents
Items Released Under FOIA


www.ntsb.gov...

The OS is a proven lie.

It looks like it is you, who suffers from NADS, not the messenger.





[edit on 15-9-2009 by impressme]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


Actually I have made no such attempt. I find your deflections, obfuscations and wild accusations fun to be honest. Would be rather unrealistic of me to expect silence from you considering. But I expect you to think as much seeing as to how you treat a simple request for proof.

Now, to your "proof", does nothing to prove the case that your website claims except it does show official documents. *Awaits the inevitable speech about it's not your place to prove your case or how I am doing this or that or that I am child or any other of your funny diatribes really.*


[edit on 15-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


I will explain this one more time for you. The link that you post is nothing more than 'phone conversation'. It is nothing official. They are not trying to contact 93. They are talking about losing contact. All they are doing is reporting the crash.

I find the best part is that they include the link to the website that you say is worthless to debunk this. If you go to page 55 of the document, you woill find ntmo-e confirming in his own words that 93 went down in Pa.

You, my friend, are delusional and need a book to help with your NADS.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 



You, my friend, are delusional and need a book to help with your NADS.


I have proved my information is fact. You my friend are in denial. So since you want to stoop to name calling, right back at ya.



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
 



I find your deflections, obfuscations and wild accusations fun to be honest. Would be rather unrealistic of me to expect silence from you considering.


It is you who has been doing the deflections, obfuscations and playing the dissinfo games
and spinning this information. People reading this material can make up their own minds let them decided if it is creditable.


United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To ATC/Radar



pilotsfor911truth.org...

I hope you don’t mind if I post this again, I just don’t want ATS readers to forget what you keep denying.





[edit on 15-9-2009 by impressme]



posted on Sep, 15 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


You can post it all you want. We are posting the SAME FREAKING THING except the whole transcript admits that 93 went down but you will not find that on the PFT site. It is not there. The only thing the pilots present is what they WANT you to read.

This is not about name calling, it is about ignorance at this point. If you cannot see the correlation between the 2 sites than you truly are not worth attempting once again to explain it too.

One question? Did you read the whole transcript? I did....



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


No, your document came from an unreliable sources furthermore, it appears to have been tamper with.


This is not about name calling,


Then stop calling everyone names!


it is about ignorance at this point.


Then stop ignoring the proof.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 08:30 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 



We are posting the SAME FREAKING THING except the whole transcript admits that 93 went down


I have read this entire document where dose it state that flight 93 crashed in the location of the shanskville crash site?

I am sure you can copy and past the part that YOU said “the whole transcript admits that 93 went down”, in this loction, in this document?

Fair enough.




[edit on 16-9-2009 by impressme]



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 09:00 PM
link   
Go back 5 posts. You will see where I told you to look. However, you did not. It is there. In black and white....netm-o I think was the moniker he was given....



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 



Go back 5 posts. You will see where I told you to look. However, you did not. It is there. In black and white....netm-o I think was the moniker he was given....





BINGO! I look it is not there. you refuse to post it, you are so desperate to prove me wrong that now you are making things up. Prove me wrong?



posted on Sep, 17 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   
First, I am not trying to shut you up. You can post whatever you feel you want. Have at it. However, if it is something that is not true, you may find myself or someone else around to keep you in check.

Here is the link, again...

www.scribd.com...


If you go to page 55 of the document that is a transcription of telephone calls, not ATC traffic, you will find the same people who were unsure if 93 was down stating that 93 is down, as well as confirming that 2 planes hit the towers.

So, in one fail swoop, we see that planes hit 2 towers and 93 is confirmed down by a link that is posted as proof it was airborne on your pilots for truth site. This is the last time I will give you the SAME information you have asked for numerous times and were provided.

Also, it was 6 posts back. I explained it. I was off by one post. Man, you got me..


[edit on 17-9-2009 by esdad71]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


This whole tangent has been you slinging accusations at me for asking for some other sources to back up that webpage's assertions.


[edit on 18-9-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
They will attack your intelligence if you misspell one word but cannot complete themselves college level sentence structure.


I found this to be hilariously ironic.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   
The FOIA released document contains a reference to the fact that someone questioned whether 93 had gone down. There was no confermation. The official record shows 93 lost radar and was magically re-found on radar seven minutes after it's supposently crashed.

No plane no bodies no evidences. 93 did not go down in Shanskville.

[edit on 18-9-2009 by impressme]



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Albastion
 


I would hope so it is called sarcasm.



posted on Sep, 18 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
So either this whole transcript is a lie or the government is lying or PT911 is lying or You are lying but some one is and it is NOT me


 


Which oneis it? You used it as evidence and it was turned against you and now you are blaming ANYONE but yourself. YOU posted it as evidence for your case. I mean, I guess you are stating now that you cannot trust the PT 911 either. Man, poor NADS sufferer...doesn't know what way to go...



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Does anyone else think it is time for a Really above Top secret 9/11 forum?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


Awesome way of bumping your thread up from months ago with an irrelevant one-liner, but no, I don't. Why do we need a 9/11 RATS?



posted on Jan, 9 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 

Calling me a lair and insulting me and ridiculing my every word does make me wrong. Furthermore you bumping your thread to personally attack me, because I just mopped the floor with your fallacies, disproving you and your rants in another thread today. Yet it sure proves that having an adult conversation with you is to emotional because that is all you keep bringing to the table.


Man, poor NADS sufferer...doesn't know what way to go...


You may want to take a long look at yourself before your ego makes another fool out of you again.

This thread about NADS was deliberately set up by you to bash everyone who does not believe in your OS of 911.

What I do not understand is why the Mods even allowed this thread to continue after it was first posted.

This thread has nothing but five pages of worthless insults against all people who have a different of opinions or who have provide facts against your nonsense.

Get over it, 911 was an inside job and the evidence proves it.








[edit on 9-1-2010 by impressme]






top topics



 
13
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join