NoC versus SoC issue. Let's set the facts straight, once and for all.

page: 14
7
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATSGrunt
reply to post by Reheat
 


Wonder why the Pentagon refuses to release the real video footage?


Because they don't have it. The FBI has it. They lost it. No, I don't buy that excuse either, but none-the-less the Pentagon does not have any footage from 9/11 because the FBI took it.




posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


John Farmer (911files), I have re-read the whole 14 pages, to get a feeling from the other side of the fence, i.o.w. the way you must have read it, with a firm believe in a SoC impacting plane.
As you do understand by now, I hope, I am slowly shifting to a center position between NoC and SoC, while I began this thread with a firm belief in a NoC flight path.

So, I encountered your posted DCA Range 3 nmi 1330 - 1339 again :



Let me first say, that I have a fairly good image in my head of the underlaying real map of that area, since I have spend quite some time once, to find that DCA radar dish on the south point of the Reagan National Airport grounds. It is build on the south point, just beside the riverside.
I have posted once a photo of it, but I can't get to my old photos repository anymore here at ATS, after some hacker found all the passwords for ATS from all those members who were still accessing their ATS pictures repository, and then staff here closed all these repositories.
That means I have to sift through all my 3000+ posts, to find that photo with that radar dish back.
It's easier to make a new one. You can easily find it yourself on a GE map from Reagan NA.

I see a green dot which is the DCA radar dish, placed on the southeast riverside point of the Reagan National airport "triangular formed island". And I see that red triangle which is the impact zone. Or is it the impact point? If so, is there a precise Lat/Long value to be extracted from this radar picture that covers the local time from 9:30 to 9:39.?

I also see a runway approaching plane from the south, and then it is landing and taxiing to the terminals. And some Potomac River approach flying planes besides (east of) the other runway that lays along the riverside, that banks sharp to the left, direction Pentagon. Of course it could also come from over the Pentagon, and going to the River Approach lanes.
There's also one flying River Approach from the north, or going to the north.
And I also see a LOT of nearly stable points, which could be helicopters in the air?
And a few very slow flying planes, with short flight paths during those 9 minutes.
I also see two planes going or leaving from Andrews AB, crossing the River Approach lanes.
One of these, or both, were seen by this fishing boat captain with that Greek name, on the Potomac, interviewed by CIT.?
And they thought it was GOPHER, the C-130.

I see AA 77 in a somewhat curved approach in its last 7 minutes, incoming FROM THE NORTH, when we assume impact time to be 9:38.
It did come in from the east, according to the FDR.

I do not see radar returns from GOPHER (the C-130 with pilot O'Brien) trailing behind AA 77, could you post this type of diagram, but now from the moment on that Gopher took off from Andrews AFB? And let it cover a wider area please, if possible? So we can see the flight path of that C-130 flown by Lt Col O'Brien.
And let it last a few minutes longer, so that we can show our readers the about 1 minute later landing B 757 with a tail number that differed only one number with that from AA 77.
A long lasting rumor was, that this plane was in fact AA 77. Which I never believed in.

I have however a nagging question :
Why is the 8 minutes lasting North to South heading of AA 77 in this radar scope picture a totally different one than the one I posted once, where I let the plane come in from the East as pictured in the FDR, and let it continue over the roofs of the Pentagon, and it could land on the northern tip of that south going runway at Reagan NA. That was a fluent turn over the roofs towards the northern end of that runway, which is totally impossible in this radar scope picture. The flight path of AA 77 pictured here would need an idiotic sharp S-turn to be able to land on the northern end of the longest runway of Reagan NA.

EDIT : Of course that west to east incoming radar trace towards the Pentagon could be AA 77, with its last part of its flight path cut off because it flew too low. It flew damn slow then, when it covered only that distance in 8 minutes....
And the south to north track "could" be GOPHER...... Very strange then, that we do not see it trail behind AA 77 in the foregoing minutes.
edit on 2/7/12 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


John, you've got this one.. I'm not going to touch it.... You're welcome!



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
reply to post by LaBTop
 


John, you've got this one.. I'm not going to touch it.... You're welcome!


No sir, I give up. I'll let him figure it out.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop

Originally posted by huh2142
reply to post by LaBTop
 


LapTop,

Are you trying to convince yourself that you are correct? No one else seems to be buying what you are selling. Good luck in figuring out the truth.

If I recall correctly it was quite a struggle for you to figure out the correct departure point of this flight.


That's right, and ALL these so called pilots and flight engineers and god knows who else in all these 9/11 conspiracy and debunking boards and blogs, were not capable of doing exactly that, with the minimal facts we had at hand.
I was the only one that succeeded in exactly calculating what the taxi lanes roll out path was for AA 77, in that start of the FDR. Based on the footwork of Tumetuesdubien from PfT, who however did not dare to come to the inevitable conclusion, which got me banned at PfT.
He knew he would be banned too, when he would have ended his previous work to the logical conclusion.

I did not notice you participating in that thread, nor in any thread at Pf911Truth.
So what fine work did you do to unravel the truly amazing facts of 9/11::::::?????

PS: try to write my screen name correct in future.


LaBTop,

I have done zero research. I have listened to what the experts say and see no reason to doubt their conclusions. Getting yourself banned from a forum for posting facts does not speak well of that forum. Why would anyone participate in that sort of group think?

My perspective is that you have carefully selected random facts to draw your conclusion. When you look at all facts in a big picture view the SoC version is the more correct one.

As you have already noted, I don't put a lot of effort into this. I'm here to learn from the subject matter experts and post my opinion when the inclination grabs me.

Don't mean to derail your thread so I'll stop talking now.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by 911files
 


I don't blame you at all. He is so screwed up with the CIT and other CT garbage that I doubt anyone can help him. The worst part is that he won't listen anyway. It is really sad, just sad...



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Instead of wasting time on condescending posts, a simple posting of this link could suffice :
bluecollarrepublican.files.wordpress.com...

I'm studying it.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by LaBTop
Instead of wasting time on condescending posts, a simple posting of this link could suffice :
bluecollarrepublican.files.wordpress.com...

I'm studying it.


Well, that has been posted time-and-time again. In one of the very first documents I linked for you, this one was linked in the footnotes (Tom's website). However, this particular resource does NOT address the questions you raised. Instead, you will read it, twist it to fit some predetermined scenario and we'll have a few more pages of text. You are best to resolve the issues that have you confused before moving on to the tougher material (like Tom's).






top topics



 
7
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join