Archive of reports inferring most of UA93 was buried

reply to post by REMISNE


Great to hear from the world's laziest "researcher". The story is right here on ATS. I never claimed that 95%. I stated that the remains of Flight 93, the property of UAL, are in storage in an Iron Mountain facility.

Your decision not to do a simple google search confirms your hypocritical stance. You seel the "truth" as long as you can convince others to do the work for you.

Pathetic

Originally posted by hooper
I never claimed that 95%.

So what do you claim?

I stated that the remains of Flight 93, the property of UAL, are in storage in an Iron Mountain facility.

Please show evidence that the reamins of flight 93 are in storage or admit your just another troll.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper

So what do you claim?

I am making no claim as to percentages. Unlike you, I don't make stuff up. When I am posting my opinion I state that accordingly.

Please show evidence that the reamins of flight 93 are in storage or admit your just another troll.

Told you where it was, go find it or admit that you are trying to avoid dealing with the obvious truth.

reply to post by hooper

For the rest of the ATS community could you please come up with the facts?
We've had to wade through all your rhetoric and your name calling,overuse of the words,"silly" and "rubbish",etc.Put up or shut up.Where is this wreckage?Show pictures.

Originally posted by hooper
Told you where it was, go find it or admit that you are trying to avoid dealing with the obvious truth.

I want actual evidence, you know the type that would hold up court. Like photos with sources.

Show me photos of the parts with sources from flight 93 in Iron Mountain.

reply to post by REMISNE


Thought so. Back to parts and numbers and paperwork.

You seem to be a real expert on plane parts and serial numbers. Exactly what parts of a plane have unique identifier? Something that can be traced to a single specimen of plane. By the way you talk I would suppose you have this information at your fingertips.

Originally posted by hooper
You seem to be a real expert on plane parts and serial numbers. Exactly what parts of a plane have unique identifier? Something that can be traced to a single specimen of plane.

Well i do have a background in aviation.

If you did any research you would know that for example FDR part and serial numbers are recorded. According to the NTSB handbook FDR part and serial numbers are required in a invesgtigation.

Any part requiring change at certain hours have unique identifiers, specifically engine parts.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper

Well i do have a background in aviation.

Then you should be able to tell me exactly what parts would should be looking for, correct?

If you did any research you would know that for example FDR part and serial numbers are recorded. According to the NTSB handbook FDR part and serial numbers are required in a invesgtigation.

So, if say, someone like the Chief of the Vehicle Recorder Division of the National Transportation Board verified that the recorders found at the Shanksville site were from Flight 93, that would pretty much seal the deal, right? I mean, these are the people who set the standards, so if they are satisfied, surely you would be also, correct? Or do you consider yourself a higher authority?

Now, we've been over this before, and I never got a clear answer. If tommorow morning the NTSB posts the parts numbers from the wreckage at Shanksville and the matching records from UAL, what is there to stop you from calling them liars? I mean anyone can make up numbers. What is the next level of "evidence" that you will require?

Any part requiring change at certain hours have unique identifiers, specifically engine parts.

And those parts would be......

Originally posted by hooper
So, if say, someone like the Chief of the Vehicle Recorder Division of the National Transportation Board verified that the recorders found at the Shanksville site were from Flight 93, that would pretty much seal the deal, right?

Well the only problem is that the Chief of the Vehicle Recorder Division report did not have the part and serial numbers which the NTSB states are needed in the investigation.

Now, we've been over this before, and I never got a clear answer. If tommorow morning the NTSB posts the parts numbers from the wreckage at Shanksville and the matching records from UAL, what is there to stop you from calling them liars?

If the information is varifiable then i would gladly agree that 93 crashed at Shankesville, but untill that time i have to keep questioning for the truth.

And those parts would be......

You can look them up if you like.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper

Well the only problem is that the Chief of the Vehicle Recorder Division report did not have the part and serial numbers which the NTSB states are needed in the investigation.

Yet, he verified it, which means he was satsified and your assertion that the numbers are required is not correct.

If the information is varifiable then i would gladly agree that 93 crashed at Shankesville, but untill that time i have to keep questioning for the truth.

OK! Now a new level of denial! First its "I wanna see the numbers, I wanna see the numbers"! Now its only acceptable if YOU can verify it. How long did it take to move those goalposts?

You can look them up if you like.

Fine, any idea where I should start?

Originally posted by hooper
Yet, he verified it, which means he was satsified and your assertion that the numbers are required is not correct.

Sorry but i have to go by the NTSB handbook on what is requred.

OK! Now a new level of denial! First its "I wanna see the numbers, I wanna see the numbers"! Now its only acceptable if YOU can verify it. How long did it take to move those goalposts?

I have always asked for information that can be verified. Thats why i always ask for evidence with sources.

Fine, any idea where I should start?

Try Boeings website


[edit on 22-2-2010 by REMISNE]

reply to post by REMISNE

Sorry but i have to go by the NTSB handbook on what is requred.

Handbook for accident investigation. This was not an accident.

Originally posted by hooper
Handbook for accident investigation. This was not an accident.

DDAAHH, do you think this still covers criminal investigations?

I mean it is still about what is needed for an investigation.

reply to post by REMISNE


Uh, no. The NTSB is all about investigating accidents to determine causes and seek remedies rooted in those causes.

There was nothing to be learned here from an in-depth anaylsis of the crash or the preformance of the plane. Nothing. The plane was not the cause, the operation was not the cause, the environment was not the cause and the system was not the cause. The cause of the crash was by purposeful human hand.

Ergo, no reason for a "crash" investigation. No need to make sure the hydraulic systems were all operating according to the manual because what caused the crash was, as the saying goes, "a loose nut behind the wheel".

reply to post by REMISNE

I want actual evidence, you know the type that would hold up court. Like photos with sources.

Well here are pictures with sources. Were used in Moussaoui trial so have
stood up in court.

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Cockpit voice recorder

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Flight recorder

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Have no doubt will find some idiotic reason to ignore.....

Originally posted by hooper
Uh, no. The NTSB is all about investigating accidents to determine causes and seek remedies rooted in those causes.

But in a criminal investigation they provide technical help because they are the only agency with the experience and equipment to investigate crashes.

Remember wwe are talking a criminal investiation so everything must be properly invesitgated even if they think or beleive they know what happened.

Originally posted by thedman
Well here are pictures with sources. Were used in Moussaoui trial so have
stood up in court.

Well for one we are not talking about the trial.

Second some of this evidence would be questioned in a new trial.

Third this evidence was not good enough to charge OBL with 9/11.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Third this evidence was not good enough to charge OBL with 9/11.

When was OBL on trial? Anyone else miss that trial as well? Can you post a link to that trial?

or is it just something else you just made up!

Second some of this evidence would be questioned in a new trial.

Which evidence exactly would be questioned, and why?

[edit on 23/2/10 by dereks]

Originally posted by dereks
When was OBL on trial? Anyone else miss that trial as well? Can you post a link to that trial?

As stated several times, both the FBI and DOJ have stated that there is not enough evidence to charge OBL with being behind 9/11.

Which evidence exactly would be questioned, and why?

Photos that do not have proper sources and the fact that there are photos and videos not released.

Cameras that were removed from buildings close by.

Also that the question of proper chain of custody for some evidence like DNA.

Again that the DNA testing at the time was not that great and the new testing that NIST had to come up with was not ready untill 2002.

Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by dereks

As stated several times, both the FBI and DOJ have stated that there is not enough evidence to charge OBL with being behind 9/11.

As stated several times? One FBI spokesman said that once relative to a question about the wording on a wanted poster. The FBI has said:

"The alleged terrorists on this list have been indicted by sitting Federal Grand Juries in various jurisdictions in the United States for the crimes reflected on their wanted posters. Evidence was gathered and presented to the Grand Juries, which led to their being charged. The indictments currently listed on the posters allow them to be arrested and brought to justice. Future indictments may be handed down as various investigations proceed in connection to other terrorist incidents, for example, the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001."

This includes OBL.

www.fbi.gov...