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.

 

Flight 11 hijacked before take-off?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 



That really is typical diversion, and fallacy argument...is beneath a true seeker.

There were many, many, many examples of OTHER small, lightweight objects that belonged to wither the crew, passengers, or hijackers that were found ejected free of the crash scenario.

It is what happens in crashes. It is chaotic. Items of low mass can be affected in very, very different ways than more compact, dense massive ones.

Really....this is not a secret, the information is everywhere, if one cares to look, instead of scoffing.




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

It is what happens in crashes. It is chaotic. Items of low mass can be affected in very, very different ways than more compact, dense massive ones.

Really....this is not a secret, the information is everywhere, if one cares to look, instead of scoffing.


What else is what happens in crashes? The black box ALWAYS SURVIVES AND IS RECOVERED. It is what happens in crashes.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


No....the Flight recorders do NOT 'always survive', nor are they 'always recovered'.

I already put everything in my long post, scroll up.

If one chooses not to read it, or chooses to reject logic in favour of nonsense, then there's nothing that can be done about that.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   
So either they were in the cockpit before take off... or the hijackers never existed...

Because from the info revealed earlier, the door leading to the cockpit was never opened during all the flight.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 



WRONG!

Read the thread.

The assertion that the door was "never opened" is A) WRONG! and, B) Made only in relation to American 77.

Still...it is WRONG!



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


hey thanks for your reply about the black boxes not being indestructible, I was hoping you'd bring it up - because I'm not entirely sure.

One thing though the point I was making is there are a lot of bizarre co-incidences. Bizarre co-incidences are always considered to be a motive and a matter of legal investigation in a single homicide, as a matter of LAW.

That's not just an opinion, I feel it's the truth. But several thousand deaths?

The real question is - which would be asked in a courtroom is, are there any examples you can give that show a black box that didn't survive a crash

It's also true that for the black box to be melted at high temperature it would have to exceed that which a plane alone.. indeed.

I don't think there has been any investigation or simulation whatsoever as to what would cause the forces in how a black box would be irrecoverable , twice, on two separate building footprints.

You are right to imply it's just a co-incidence. as far as I know though, it's a world first , and perhaps this is a special 'circumstance' - but if it is, why hasn't it been mentioned as fact - and why? I surely can only find this dishonest and would consider it perjury in any sane state of mind, to disclude such lines of thought, which, in fairness is why I replied stating that in science all options must be considered , and presented. It's up to the review process to decide whether or not data is erroneous, and to do that _all data must be considered_

Perhaps the 9/11 commission considered a lot of things and took a lot of actions for reasons that may always been unknown to us . That of course does not exempt than from perjury or questions, which I think, was my main point - about proper and fair consideration occuring after inspection of all the FACTS, and co-incidences, assumptions and presumptions.

Surely in a world such as this, we can accept conclusions, at least ones considered sane, and, surely this must occur after consideration, and not before. For any scientific judgment preceding inspection, must surely be the second assumption made, and not science any longer.

This is how FEMA dealt with the crime scene

911 is a crime scene.

It is a fact that it has not been treated as such. I still don't find that unreasonable. And you make some most excellent points - but I still feel my initial point stands.

Upon inspection of the facts, there are some very clear motives and proof that investigation is not scientific in nature, but political

This should be expected , of course. It was a political event, right?

I still really don't think that means we shouldn't ask questions, it's illegal in fact the way investigation was conducted. At least it was, before Patriot I and II

Lets not match their dismissals and assumptions with some of our own, otherwise there will never be a route to the truth , if one existed.

This is why I feel it is a somewhat intentional thing to not want to place blame.

And although I don't believe Flight 11 was hijacked before it took off - and agree it is unlikely. I think we cannot ignore supporting co-incidences with established motives via testimony - or we'd be doing what 9/11 commission did.

Earlier in your post you imply that it was 'just bad luck' these buildings got hit by planes, and 4 planes got high jacked.

Yes, exceptionally bad luck. The chances of engagement orders, for the first time , being changed to be politically controlled (civilian), only several months before a terrorist attack, are extremely low, and quite bizarre.

Also the the chances of witnesses directly claiming to be in the war room that day implying the commander and chief explicitly stated to not intercept is extremely troubling to me.

Why would someone say that? Because they are a terrorist



[edit on 14-12-2009 by UFOabducteebe]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Maybe they are terrorists? Or they are telling the truth in fact.

Co-incidentals are very numerous.

That should be decided in a court room.

Question 1: Has it been?

Question 2: Is there one example of a black box ever not being recovered

Question 3: Was it a co-incidence that witnesses are saying the building exploded before planes hit

Question 4: Was it a co-incidence there is absolutely no mention of this, or building 7 or the 'psychic' predictions of the BBC?

Question 5: Would any sane person expect to see this not being expected in a court of law?

The only thing I truly know the answer is question 5.

Questions are good, dismissing evidence, in my opinion, before considering can't be good science, good politics, good manners, or good thinking in general!!!

So, thats my only tittle really


Peace out,
Abductee


[edit on 14-12-2009 by UFOabducteebe]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Lillydale
 


No....the Flight recorders do NOT 'always survive', nor are they 'always recovered'.

I already put everything in my long post, scroll up.

If one chooses not to read it, or chooses to reject logic in favour of nonsense, then there's nothing that can be done about that.


OK, perhaps always is a strong term. Fine, you can have that.

Now please show me where in your post it makes any sense that the DNA of EVERY TERRORIST could survive, be found, and testable, and yet...no black boxes. Can you explain that really? You honestly believe they could find micrscopic DNA that both survived trauma and heat but not black boxes? The force and heat was enough to completely bring down those buildings and hide those black boxes but DNA and passports survive? Really? I guess I missed alllll that in your post.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

It appears you aren't fully taking into account the MASS of the buildings, and the energies involved.

I see that there also seems to be the misconception that the Recorders are somehow completely impervious to desturction:


...'lost' devices that are specifically designed to be recoverable no matter what the circumstance.


No, they will not survive "no matter what the circumstance." That is an impossible goal. They are designed to survive what has been shown, historically, to be recorded from previous accident investigations.

They can withstand incredible amounts of G-force. Being solid state today, they will survive a lot of abuse....but immense crushing under hundreds of tons of hot debris? The metal casings are unlkely to survive that, intact. They were involved in a very intense fire, for a very long time. Longer than most airpalne accident fires burn, because there was so much additional material, in the buildings, to contribute to the blazes.




Hey, you are right, I'm not considering the mass of the building. But can you think of a study that has? Of how this could happen, if at all.

This is why i continue to put forward the notion that we are not being ignorant, we are asking questions. Dismissing data is ignorant!!

If this simple question of how - cannot be adequately answered - then more inspection of new data is important no??? there is no excuse, in sanity or law, to ignore a witness indicating not only were the black boxes found, but it is claimed by many of the 23 survivors, things not mentioned in the 9/11 commission, and now it has been claimed something even more preposterous, admittedly, which supports what has been said about 9/11 commission restricting access to data .

Question: is that scientific? Or political in nature?

Question: should a murder trial be of a political nature when politicians, according to witness testimony, may be implied as suspects to treason. That's actually no small accusation

how can we not ask questions, how can you dismiss new testimony was all I intended to really point out
I am glad I have gone to asking much more questions... that's how you get answers (Unless you think my questions are stupid in which case you are sorely mistaken!)


Still though, the 2 things i care about most, short to deny rejection before inspection:

question: how exactly did those blackboxes get destroyed?
question: can you give me one example of a study or it happening elsewhere, because I honestly can't and i've tried - believe me

Peace, & respect
Abductee

[edit on 14-12-2009 by UFOabducteebe]

[edit on 14-12-2009 by UFOabducteebe]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 



...the DNA of EVERY TERRORIST could survive...


You seem to have a fan club, starring your posts without reading them, apparently...

Whatever.

This example shows (again) a common tactic; putting words into peoples' mouths. (Or, in this case, attributing typed words to someone who never wrote them, nor meant to imply. It probably has some Latin name, this 'argument' from fallacy...or whatever you call it...).


Ya know.....was reading about the WTC cleanup. Since this thread is supposed to be talking about American 11, and ONLY Flight 11 and its hijacking, I think this has some merit to add...if only tangential.

In the rubble from the WTC Towers there were OTHER victims besides those on the airplanes. Am I correct? Does anyone dispute that fact?

There were various conflicts amongst the people responsible for removing debris, while at the same time searching for Human remains. Pressure to 'hurry', and pressure to not miss anything. Friction existed between the NYPD and the NYFD...for the NYFD knew they had fallen 'brothers' in there, and expected great care to be taken, and respect given, to any remains immediately recognizable as a firefighter. Much emotion, as you can imagine.

Anything and everything that was even thought to be possibly Human remains was collected and examined. Quite a bit of organic material turned out to be non-Human as a result. (Food ... meats...from the various restaurants, etc.)

MUCH of the further identification and sifting of the debris, especially for any DNA match for the sake of the survivors' and to help them grieve, was done at the Fresh Kills landfill.

It was a very daunting task, you can imagine.

Isn't it painfully obvious that in absence of a DNA match with any known crew or passenger or firefighter or office worker from the building...that by process of elimination that DNA must have bbelonged to a terrorist?

I don't see why that's a difficult concept to grasp.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Isn't it painfully obvious that in absence of a DNA match with any known crew or passenger or firefighter or office worker from the building...that by process of elimination that DNA must have bbelonged to a terrorist?

I don't see why that's a difficult concept to grasp.




It isn't so obvious considering that not every crew, passenger or firefighter or office worker have been identified.

This article is from 2006.


Five years after the 9/11 attacks, technicians in the New York City medical examiner's office have identified about half of nearly 21,000 body parts recovered near the site of the World Trade Center.

Ellen Borakove, a spokeswoman for the office, says work has been complicated by the discovery in the past year of 760 fragments of remains in a nearby office building being prepared for demolition. One set of remains was matched to a 9/11 victim this year.


www.usatoday.com...


Seven years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, the remains of 13 of the 19 men responsible have been identified and are in the custody of the F.B.I. and the New York City medical examiner’s office.


www.nytimes.com...


Maybe I am misreading what you said. But I have always been curious about where the US got the dna to match the terrorists.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


Yeah...I was writing in haste, and meant to include that not in ALL cases were positive IDs made. It was, as I noted, extremely difficult task.

But, again...this is ancillary to the topic.

DNA has been discussed at great lengths (no pun intended) in other threads, otehr times.

Back to the word of the day: No. I do not know, nor understand the motives behind this man's claims about a "hijacking' of American Flight 11 before takeoff. It is patently absurd to believe it true in any way.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker


Isn't it painfully obvious that in absence of a DNA match with any known crew or passenger or firefighter or office worker from the building...that by process of elimination that DNA must have bbelonged to a terrorist?

I don't see why that's a difficult concept to grasp.





So they had an accurate list of each and every person that was supposed to be in those buildings from which to eliminate?

So the DNA magically survives the exact same circumstances that you claim are the reason the black boxes did NOT?

Then they had a list of every tourist, visitor, and client in the buildings that day and were able to gather a sample of each and every person so they had a pool from which to use this process of elimination?

Yes, that is a little hard to grasp considering logic and all.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by jam321
 


Back to the word of the day: No. I do not know, nor understand the motives behind this man's claims about a "hijacking' of American Flight 11 before takeoff. It is patently absurd to believe it true in any way.


Which as I have pointed out , it is equally as patently absurd to dismiss something before considering it, which was my main point anyway



Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by truthquest
 



Back to the claim though, it seems ridiculous that the hijackers would be allowed to take off after entering the cockpit.


This will turn out to be just another in a long line of steaming piles of moose droppings.

This is ludicrous from the get-go, it is so outrageous it doesn't even bear examination.

There is NO WAY this is true. Absolutely not. Zero possiblity.


As I have repeatedly said, (and hope you can accept) - it's not a great way to start a scientific or fair process of consideration with concluding it is not possible. That would suggest the evidence has zero value, because you've decided it to be so.

Call it ludicrous and tell other people they are 'playing tricks' with words. To me, there can be no greater trick than declaring Zero possibility. Not only is that not represented in the physics of science, it's not philosophically fair either, is it?

I'm not sure whats worse, that claiming un-foundable things to disprove very legally sound lines of inquiry , and it being unscientific in nature, by definition - or the fact that you seem to represent the broad consensus among the population today.

Which is, something like 'there's no possibility of that being a reality, why even bother considering it, what a waste of time' ; I put forward the notion that you can also too , waste plenty of time ignoring truth, this can only ever be done by assumption. As assumption to me, is the only thing that's ever strayed us from it.



Just my 2 cents i guess, it is not that you do not make some good points, you do. At the very least philosophically I would not call out the neighbour for fouling in my garden - by fouling in theirs. Effectively what I am saying is you are not psychic, if you want to claim science, and foul on other peoples lack of it - you must start by not predicting the future in your first reply to the OP..

It's very easy to assume, but very difficult to find truth. I can't help but wonder that you might not have given a chance to those who seek detail, and understanding, clarification of information to aid in their understanding.

If people are wrong, and you want to show them science - you must first stop acting as a psychic. That might sound sarcastic but if one reads the second post in this thread above, it's actually what your stating. (Is that too pedant? Yes... but still
) )

Tell me, you mention several times, how unhelpful other posters are, this may be true, but how much more helpful are you being by claiming 'Zero Possibility' against your so called unfounded, unreasonable assumptions made by the OP - and the witness(es) in question?

Not a bad question, is it?

Peace
Abductee

ps; who was it who said the cockpit door was not opened during the whole flight 11?

[edit on 14-12-2009 by UFOabducteebe]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Honest, this isn't really about DNA, not here. Lilly, this is a common tactic, displayed repeatedly. Why not move it over to a thread specfic to DNA???


Then they had a list of every tourist, visitor, and client in the buildings that day and were able to gather a sample of each and every person so they had a pool from which to use this process of elimination?


But, before you go, consider taking this thought with you:

A little bit of research into the actual methods, techniques, and science of DNA collecting, matching and forensics might be worthwhile study subject.

Just sayin'.....

Oh, and just for a hint: Let's say (and glad this is probably not the case) that you personally knew a visitor, tourist or client that was in o ne of the Towers that morning, and was never seen again. Is it fair to then assume that perhaps that individual might have been a victim in the collapse of the building? Is it not obvious that the individual would have personal items in his/her bathroom, bedroom, car...whatever...from which a representative DNA sample could be isolated, for a hope of a match at some time in the future???

Over simplified, but isn't that the basis of how DNA works, in such cases???



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Lillydale
 


Honest, this isn't really about DNA, not here. Lilly, this is a common tactic, displayed repeatedly. Why not move it over to a thread specfic to DNA???


K. Thanks for telling me where to stop reading. Maybe I will catch you in a DNA thread and you can school me there. Thanks, it has been real and it has been fun, it just hasn't been real fun.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Isn't it painfully obvious that in absence of a DNA match with any known crew or passenger or firefighter or office worker from the building...that by process of elimination that DNA must have bbelonged to a terrorist? I don't see why that's a difficult concept to grasp.


That is incorrect and you know it. One would really have to be totally ignorant to fall for such nonsense. Over a thousands bodies at the WTC where never identified or found. Where do you get the process of elimination from??? The hijackers were using stolen identities. To whom was the DNA was being match to?? And do explain to me what kind of DNA can sift threw millions of tons ash?





Missing Bodies

More Than 1000 Bodies Are Unaccounted for



The number of people believed to have been killed in the World Trade Center attack hovers around 2,780, three years after the attack. 1 2 No trace has been identified for about half the victims, despite the use of advanced DNA techniques to identify individuals. Six weeks after the attack only 425 people had been identified. 3

A year after the attack, only half of the victims had been identified. 19,906 remains were recovered from Ground Zero, 4,735 of which were identified. Up to 200 remains were linked to a single person. 4 Of the 1,401 people identified, 673 of the IDs were based on DNA alone. Only 293 intact bodies were found. Only twelve could be identified by sight. 5

The aircraft impacts and fires in all probability would not have destroyed a single body beyond positive identification. Nor have building collapses ever been known to destroy human remains beyond recognition. However, the buildings were destroyed in a manner that converted most of their non-metallic contents to homogeneous dust, including the bodies. This destruction of the bodies assured that no exact determination could ever be made regarding who was piloting the jets at impact, and the condition of the people on board.

This is one of many examples in which evidence which could either confirm or refute the official story was destroyed. For example, a finding that the people onboard Flights 11 and 175 had been killed by some means before reaching the Towers would undermine the official story of multiple hijackings. The effective cremation of the bodies eliminated most of the evidence that would support such a finding.


911research.wtc7.net...



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


I am replying to you in a DNA related thread It would be lovely if you could answer me there.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 


As usual, you neglected to include the rest of the article, which has some interesting information.

However, I have not studied in depth the tragedy of the WTC, human remains, and the efficacy or lack thereof regarding the ability to recover substantial amounts of DNA, or anything that could be "buried" and mourned, to help provide closure for those victims' grieving loved ones.

Certainly, by even mentioning DNA (although I didn't start the discussion) it threw this thread off onto the wrong tangent, and ANY discussion such as that is going to be fraught with minor mistakes and misunderstandings, which is emblematic of the entire 9/11 "debate" anyways.

I think that forensic work is the best it can possibly be, with the techonology available today. That doesn't mean it won't improve over time, as new techniques are introduced.

BUt, before I go, here's the rest of the "911Research" article I alluded to:


Human Remains Discovered in 2006


(Note the dat, please...)


About a year after the official program to identify victims had ended, more human remains turned up on top of the Deutsche Bank Building, which stands about 400 feet to the south of the location of the former South Tower. According to the Associated Press, more than 300 human bone fragments were recovered from the roof of the 43-story skyscraper as workers removed toxic debris in preparation for a floor-by-floor take-down of the building. Most of the fragments were less then 1/16th inch in length and were found in gravel raked to the sides of the roof of the building. The Lower Manhattan Development Corporation purchased the building and is planning to begin its deconstruction in June, after removal of toxic waste -- including asbestos, lead, and other materials deposited on it by the destruction of the Twin Towers.

Some victims' family members, indignant that the human remains in the Deutsche Bank remained undiscovered for so long, said that the planed deconstruction should be postponed until the building is thoroughly searched for other remains. According to the New York Daily News, as of the second week of April, 2006, 1,151 of the 2,749 people killed in the attack have not been identified, and the medical examiner holds more than 9,000 unidentified human remains.



AS TO American Airlines 11, back to topic.

As I mentioned forensics, that is not limited just to laboratory work and DNA, but I think it encompasses a lot of old fashioned detective work too.

THAT would be the way the hijackers' identies were determined.

Also, the fact that the various federal agencies goofed so badly, allowing those people to operate right under their noses, so to speak, and carry out their plots has to be part of what people sense being "wrong" with what is commonly disparaged as the "OS" by the "GL"s....both of those monikers are unfortunately dismissive to the point that they have become a joke, to many, because they exemplify the rampant ignarance exhibited by many of these "Truthers"...another moniker, for sure. But, accepted too. AND equally incorrect in description, if 'truth' be known.

9/11 "deniers" is a far more accurate description.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



Honest, this isn't really about DNA, not here. Lilly, this is a common tactic, displayed repeatedly. Why not move it over to a thread specfic to DNA???

Then they had a list of every tourist, visitor, and client in the buildings that day and were able to gather a sample of each and every person so they had a pool from which to use this process of elimination?
But, before you go, consider taking this thought with you:

A little bit of research into the actual methods, techniques, and science of DNA collecting, matching and forensics might be worthwhile study subject.

Just sayin'.....

Oh, and just for a hint: Let's say (and glad this is probably not the case) that you personally knew a visitor, tourist or client that was in o ne of the Towers that morning, and was never seen again. Is it fair to then assume that perhaps that individual might have been a victim in the collapse of the building? Is it not obvious that the individual would have personal items in his/her bathroom, bedroom, car...whatever...from which a representative DNA sample could be isolated, for a hope of a match at some time in the future???

Over simplified, but isn't that the basis of how DNA works, in such cases???





According to the New York Daily News, as of the second week of April, 2006, 1,151 of the 2,749 people killed in the attack have not been identified, and the medical examiner holds more than 9,000 unidentified human remains.


911research.wtc7.net...


We are not allowed to post excessive post articles, my intentions are not to deliberately to mislead the readers.

Yes the article says 9,000 unidentified human remains. Looks like, DNA sure didn’t identify any of the 9,000 remains, so there goes your hairbrush conspiracies theory. LOL



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join