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.

 

9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

page: 239
100
<< 236  237  238    240  241  242 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 And they all used a four digit tail number after the year. The RF-4Cs made in
Might have had the year wrong, its been over 25 years. But i am sure of the number becasue we used call her "triple nickel", after the birdstrike she never flew right again so we called her "triple cripple". The tail numbers are 3 digits, the zero is not shown. Please check out the the following site about tail numbers. www.aerospaceweb.org...




posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
I know all about tail numbers. I've seen them use both, depending on the aircraft.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 I know all about tail numbers. I've seen them use both, depending on the aircraft.
Well if you knew about tail numbers why did you state they used 4 numbers when they only use 3 for the serial number? [edit on 24-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Probably because if you had read ALL of my post I said that I have seen them use four digits as well, depending on the aircraft. They USUALLY use 3, but there have been times they used 4 as well.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:19 PM
link   
An absolutely lovely piece of investigative reporting or journalism. It brings us back to the very Basic question, Where was Rummy the Rumsteak and did Cheney help to bring-in used plane parts from the Pentagon Scrapyard to cover-up the Crap of a Job. To be honest, this proves to be an inferior con-job cover-up, which seems to be covered -up after the cover-up was exposed to be a scam-job. Truth has a unique way of Exposing itself, no matter how deep it gets covered !!!



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 They USUALLY use 3, but there have been times they used 4 as well. [/qute] But not on an F-4 as i have shown.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   
In the ONE picture of an F-4 tail that they had on that page? Ok, I see the margins/spacing are still screwy in this one. [edit on 5/24/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 In the ONE picture of an F-4 tail that they had on that page?
Are those Nataional Guard planes? Might also be first line of a model or test bed.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 05:53 PM
link   
They are active aircraft in the system. The tail number doesn't change between Air National Guard and active duty aircraft. They're also not test beds. They are active F-4s and they all use different style tail numbers.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 They are active aircraft in the system. The tail number doesn't change between Air National Guard and active duty aircraft. They're also not test beds. They are active F-4s and they all use different style tail numbers.
Well all the F-4s i have seen had the same tail numbers and codes exept National Guard NASA testbeds.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
And as I've shown not all F-4s used the same style of tail number. The majority of them used the three digit numbers, but not all of them. The same holds true for F-15s and F-16s as well. Some of them are special tail number aircraft, but not all of them. I found at least three different squadrons that used the 4 digit tail numbers.



posted on May, 24 2008 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58 And as I've shown not all F-4s used the same style of tail number. The majority of them used the three digit numbers, but not all of them.
But we agree that the biggest majority of them used 3. So we are both abot on the same page.



posted on May, 25 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jthomas You admitted to everyone here that you do not know. Therefore your claim is meaningless.
No, i stated the witness testimonies would be worthless because common sense says they would not hold up in court, any half decent lawyer would tear the witness statements up.
And I reminded that you have no knowledge or ability to make that claim. You are welcome to support your claim or admit it is just your opinion. Please provide the statements of those many hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw and/or recovered the wreckage, demonstrate what they saw and/or recovered.

Yes, there is no evindece (released) that proves flight 77 hit the Pentagon.
Actually, you stated:

"Since the FAA , FBI, and NTSB have not released most of the information we do not know what hit the Pentagon. If it was a plane we do not know what plane it was."
That is the fallacy of false alternatives. Provide the information that the FAA, FBI, and NTSB has released and demonstrate that eyewitness testimony and wreckage cannot be evidence of what type of aircraft and which flight it was. Demonstrate the validity of any claim that that all evidence must come from the FAA, FBI, and the NTSB.

I never stated there were no investigations, (do not put words in my mouth and misquote me).
Learn to distinguish a question from a claim. Please provide the evidence and conclusions from the ASCE an either present your evidence to support or refute it.

Just that they have not released most of the information.
So what?



posted on May, 25 2008 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas. Demonstrate the validity of any claim that that all evidence must come from the FAA, FBI, and the NTSB.
Well it seems you know nothing about the law when it comes to crime scenes. In case you did not know anytime an aircraft crash is considered a crims scene (like the 9/11 cerash sites) the FBI becomes the main investigation agency with the NTSB providing technical assistance. The only official reports about the crime scenes MUST COME FROM THE FBI AND NTSB, since they are the main investigating agencies. To date neither the FBI or NTSB has released crime scene information. If you do not believe me look for yourself and see if you can find the crime scene reports.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 To date neither the FBI or NTSB has released crime scene information.
They have yet to release their official reports. That is true. If you know that too, then why do you keep crying for the FBI and NTSB reports...knowing they arent available? What part of "not yet released" are you having problems with, Roger?



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed If you know that too, then why do you keep crying for the FBI and NTSB reports...knowing they arent available? What part of "not yet released" are you having problems with, Roger?
I have been repeating again and again that the reports have not been released, but others on here like to state they know what happened that day as if they have seen the reports. Thats why i keep asking if they have the evidence they think they do to provide it. But as usual it just proves my point that they are just posting opinions and not facts. [edit on 26-5-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 But as usual it just proves my point that they are just posting opinions and not facts.
As are you... You are posting your opinions as to what happened that day. Since you cannot argue about reports that have not been released yet. Correct?



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed You are posting your opinions as to what happened that day. Since you cannot argue about reports that have not been released yet. Correct?
No, I have posted facts and evidence to support what i post. I also post facts and evidence to show resonable doubt about the official story.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 02:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1 No, I have posted facts and evidence to support what i post. I also post facts and evidence to show resonable doubt about the official story.
Seems many on here have posted more credible evidence than you. Yet when presented with it, you start crying that it's "not evindence"[sic], or some other excuse...to try and cover up that your data has been proven wrong. Ah well...it's not like anything you are doing/saying is helping the 9/11 cause anyway. Just another nameless person ona an internet forum.



posted on May, 26 2008 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Disclosed
 
Disclosed, I share your frustrations. You also live here, in the DC area? See, we feel this much more deeply than anyone who is so far removed.... Take care...




top topics



 
100
<< 236  237  238    240  241  242 >>

log in

join