When did they ID AA77's parts?

Originally posted by weedwhacker???
Just one that opos into my memory banks is from Purdue University.

Its a good thing you bring up the Purdue video becasue it backs up my point that the planes were shredded as soon as the entered the building, the major part of the airframe did not even make it halfway through the building to the ineer beams. If you need help understanding this please let me know.

Oh and as far as the photos of the hole on the outside of the towers also shows that the planes barely made it into the building. If you need help understanding this please let me know.





[edit on 31-12-2009 by REMISNE]

[edit on 31-12-2009 by REMISNE]

reply to post by REMISNE


Not sure if you just WANT to be untruthful, regarding the Purdue videos, or not.

...the major part of the airframe did not even make it halfway through the building to the ineer beams.

As will be shown in this Purdue video (focusing on the WTC, in this case) lots of parts, and yes, even some "major" parts made it MORE than halfway through the building. In fact, and not certain WHY anyone is disputing this, the evidence is in the VIDEOS that day, as components and the fireball came gushing out the OTHER side!




Now, reasonable to infer that, the airplane at the Pentagon, also exhibited somewhat similar, though not of course, exactly similar behavior, due to the different design and construction of the buildings.

This is so painfully obvious, to anyone who is intellectually honest, that I cannot understand the intransigence in this continuing inane argument.

A link to the Purdue Pentagon video.


Now, obviously, in BOTH cases (well, all three) the computer simulations are designed only to represent it to the best of today's computing power, and as simulations they cannot be expected to be accurate down to every detail, millimeter by millimeter.

It's obvious, to those who don't refuse to accept logic, that whilst certainly ALL parts of the airplane have a combined velocity, and trajectory, during the sequence OTHER forces can cause some parts and fragments to be flung in OTHER directions, different from their original vector direction.

MANY forces at work, happening very quickly, faster than human comprehension, and not anything from a person's everyday experience, certainly.

Thus, while a greater portion of the main portions of the airplane continued to penetrate, certain other smaller, lighter and randomly acted upon parts and fragments were tossed about in varying directions.

Hence, a scattering of debris OUTSIDE the Pentagon.

I don't know how better to explain it --- the videos show an example, of course. Common sense should be able to allow people to understand how the chaos and unpredictability of EVERY facet of the events can NEVER be completely modeled in a computer today.

(Well, maybe there ARE computers more powerful, but they probably aren't accessible, due to cost or secrecy concerns).

Oh, and gee, a thought!

The gist of the conspiracy dudes and dudettes is that it was all "planned" and/or "staged" or whatever the CT-du-jour is. But, when it comes to vast, advanced computer power, who do you think would most likely have access???

With all of those tools, why was their "fake" crash so "poor"???

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Not sure if you just WANT to be untruthful, regarding the Purdue videos, or not.

Let me show photos form the video tha show that the airframe was shredded as it entered the building.

Does the following photo from the Purdue video show the aiframe being shredded as it enters the building, YES or NO

i114.photobucket.com...

As will be shown in this Purdue video (focusing on the WTC, in this case) lots of parts, and yes, even some "major" parts made it MORE than halfway through the building.

Well at least you admit it is in parts meaning the airframe was shredded as it entered the building.

Hence, a scattering of debris OUTSIDE the Pentagon.

Too bad you cannot show this so called debris with proper sources that match it to the plane.

reply to post by REMISNE


So the aircraft barely made it inside ?

Here are pictures of exterior panel knocked off opposite side - notice the
landing gear wheel embedded in it







Map of aircraft parts found AFTER EXITING building

I´d like to propose that we examine the OP.
When did they ID AA77´s parts?

1.- Who is they?

There´s nobody who needed to identify AA77.
It was known on 9/11 that AA77 was the B757 that crashed at the Pentagon.

This was not an accident. So no accident investigation was needed.
So, people like P4T that try to use the accident investigation arguments to go about the lack of ID of parts has no merit in this issue. They only do this to further their agenda of selling CD´s and what not.

ID wasn´t needed at any time because all other airplanes flying that day were accounted for, including AA11, UA175 and UA93.

So, we don´t need to look any further. There´s absolutely NO DOUBT that AA77 was crashed at the Pentagon. It simply couldn´t be any other flight.
Plus we have all the corroborating witnesses, photographs and forensic evidence.

Thanks.

Originally posted by rush969

Plus we have all the corroborating witnesses, photographs and forensic evidence.

Thanks.

So you argue that it did not need to be identified and then argue that people identified it before it even crashed and then say we have evidence in the form of witnesses, photographs, and forensic evidence? Cool, which of any of those proved it was AA77?

Thanks!

Originally posted by thedman
So the aircraft barely made it inside ?

Yes, the arframe was shredded as soon as it entered the building as shown in the Purdue video.

Originally posted by rush969
There´s nobody who needed to identify AA77.
It was known on 9/11 that AA77 was the B757 that crashed at the Pentagon.

Since the plane crashes on 9/11 are considered a crime the FBI must ID the aircraft, basic CSI 101.



[edit on 1-1-2010 by REMISNE]

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by rush969
There´s nobody who needed to identify AA77.
It was known on 9/11 that AA77 was the B757 that crashed at the Pentagon.

Since the plane crashes on 9/11 are considered a crime the FBI must ID the aircraft, basic CSI 101.



[edit on 1-1-2010 by REMISNE]

Who says they didn't? There is more than one way to do that, you know. If the FBI has a list of all the passengers on Flight 77 and their human remains are found and scientifically identified at the crash site and I don't think there is a better way to ID the plane.

Part numbers and maintenance records could be wrong, misidentified, incomplete, etc, etc., etc. However DNA is unique. If the last thing John Doe is seen doing is boarding Flight 77 and then an American Airlines plane is witnessed crashing into the Pentagon and John Doe is ID then that pretty much cinches the plane ID.

Originally posted by hooper
Who says they didn't?

If they did we do not have the reports that they did.

However DNA is unique.

If the fire at the Pentagon was hot enough to destroy the plane it would have also destroyed DNA.

If the passengers were in the back of the plane how did thier bodies end up in a pile inside the Pentagon?

There are questions about the proper control and chain of custody for the DNA.

reply to post by REMISNE

If the fire at the Pentagon was hot enough to destroy the plane it would have also destroyed DNA.

Uh, who has ever said that the fires at the Pentagon were so all consuming as to destroy everything down to the microscopic level?

If the passengers were in the back of the plane how did thier bodies end up in a pile inside the Pentagon?

Because that is where the plane ended up?

There are questions about the proper control and chain of custody for the DNA.

Really? Please post these specific questions. Exactly which sample is in question? Who has raised these questions?

Originally posted by hooper
Uh, who has ever said that the fires at the Pentagon were so all consuming as to destroy everything down to the microscopic level?

Might want to do some research, heat destroys DNA.

Because that is where the plane ended up?

The back of the plane did not make it into the building.



[edit on 1-1-2010 by REMISNE]

reply to post by Lillydale


You are trying to derail here. I´m NOT argueing anything.
I´m mearly pointing out the very well known fact that IDing any of the hijacked airliners of 9/11 wasn´t necesary.
The fact is very simple. Just by elimination we can clarify.
All planes were accounted for that day.
UA175, UA93, AA11 and AA77 were hijacked and crashed by suicidal terrorists.
The rest of the other planes that morning were stoped on the ground or brought to land somewhere, and were all accounted for.
So that only leaves those four airplanes as the hijacked ones.
Now, that only leaves one possibility for argueing AA77 needed to be identified.
That would be that AA77 didn´t crash at the Pentagon.
And that would require you and others to provide some piece of evidence that something else crashed there.
That also opens a pretty big can of worms.
1.- Why would anybody want to make it appear as though AA77 was hijacked and crashed at the Pentagon, and at the same time AA11 and UA175 are REALLY HIJACKED AND CRASHED at the WTC towers???
But AA77 is not crashed at the Pentagon???
Somehow AA77 is faked??? What for??? Where are all the people of that flight???
2.- How would they set up the light poles, the crash site, the bodies, DNA, witnesses that say they saw an AA jet, plane parts bearing AA paint job. (All of this without anybody noticing anything.)???
Doesn´t make any sense. It´s terribly more complicated. The simple and obvious explanation is AA77 is the one that crashed at the Pentagon after being hijacked by a group of terrorists, and there´s plenty of evidence to back this up.

Originally posted by rush969
You are trying to derail here. I´m NOT argueing anything.
I´m mearly pointing out the very well known fact that IDing any of the hijacked airliners of 9/11 wasn´t necesary.

This is where you and others show that you do not know anything about whats going on with 9/11.

The plane crashes on 9/11 are considered a crime scene, so therefore proper ID of the aircraft must be done. Basic CSI 101.

Originally posted by REMISNE
so therefore proper ID of the aircraft must be done.

and it was done!

Basic CSI 101.

obviously someone who gets all his information from a tv show!

reply to post by REMISNE

This is where you and others show that you do not know anything about whats going on with 9/11.

The plane crashes on 9/11 are considered a crime scene, so therefore proper ID of the aircraft must be done. Basic CSI 101.

You are correct and these OS believers will close their eye tight when they read this. In fact none of them can stand the truth that under the FOIA this TRUTH was exposed.
No it fun for them to “ignore all the facts” and to come in here and ridicule you because they assume everyone in the world supports their OS fantasies.

F.B.I. Counsel: No Records Available Revealing ID Process Of Recovered 9/11 Plane Wreckage

www.911blogger.com...

Now they will insult me for posting the truth.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Uh, who has ever said that the fires at the Pentagon were so all consuming as to destroy everything down to the microscopic level?

Might want to do some research, heat destroys DNA.

Uh, Ok. Do you really think that every last cell of organic matter was destroyed? Hell, they can't even do that in a crematorium.

Because that is where the plane ended up?

The back of the plane did not make it into the building.

You of course have something to back up this extraordinary original claim, right?

Originally posted by REMISNE
This is where you and others show that you do not know anything about whats going on with 9/11.

The plane crashes on 9/11 are considered a crime scene, so therefore proper ID of the aircraft must be done. Basic CSI 101.

As someone who avidly watches all the CSI tv shows and enjoys them very much, there is a big difference between that and the real world.

If a car crashes in a certain way, which is mysterious to the CSI team, they then take apart the car, and try to find what caused the "accident". They would then find something like the brakes cut, or accelerator stuck or something. Ok mystery solved in that case. However, if the car is seen PURPOSELY ramming into a building, or group of people, or into another car (with the driver behaving suicidally or strangely) and it is already confirmed by numerous eyewitnesses, then the CSI are not going to go and start checking the car's brakes first. They are going to either check the driver and question him/her (if still alive or concious) or eyewitnesses or the victims. THAT is how they would do it. If it is on purpose, investigate why it was on purpose. If it was an accident, then you check why it happened and what caused the accident (ie weather, part failure, pilot error, etc).

Same as at the Pentagon. People saw an aircraft DELIBERATELY crash into the Pentagon. That means, the CSIs at the site are not going to be checking the aircraft's brakes or engines or serial numbers because it was NOT an accident. The CSIs are going to be looking for the A*holes that caused the plane to crash into the Pentagon and also look for the black boxes that could help them determine who did it and why. They are not going to be looking to see if the engines malfunctioned and the flaps and the brakes and the rudder, etc etc etc. That would be a waste of time.

Originally posted by hooper
Uh, Ok. Do you really think that every last cell of organic matter was destroyed? Hell, they can't even do that in a crematorium.

NO but the DNA tsting back in 2001 was not that great, in fact NIST had to come up with nw DNA testing just for 9/11.

You of course have something to back up this extraordinary original claim, right?

Yes i do,

1. Common sense.

2. Construction of the plane and builing.

3. Eye witness close to the buidling.

Originally posted by GenRadek

As someone who avidly watches all the CSI tv shows and enjoys them very much, there is a big difference between that and the real world.

Then you should know that one of the first things done in a crime scene is to verify the ID of the victim/victims and whatever is invoved in the crime.

In this case it would be the planes.