"September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor" It's not rocket science-COMMON SENSE!! VS DENIAL!!

page: 13
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 11:47 AM
reply to post by LaBTop

Dude you're all over the map. Mach # isn't applicable at low altitude, CAS is, which nearer to sea level, as you've discovered, (although you don't seem to get the low altitude vs. high relationship between EAS and TAS), is very near TAS, and EAS. Also the north tower plane did not exceed it's Vd/Md design dive limit speed (of 420knots KCAS), although it was close, to within 5 or 10 knots i believe.

Also, although everyone makes errors from time to time, the essential data from P4T is valid, and the JREF'ers are making all kinds of mistakes and blunders in particular as it relates to EAS and TAS at higher altitude, which only demonstrates further the validity of the P4T data and that they (the JREF's) are generally clueless, and yes i read a good portion of that thread you linked.

What's relevant is Vmo/Mmo and Vd/Md, of 360knots/.86m and 420knots/.91m but to understand what that means through ascending and descending altitude, one must understand the relationship between CAS, TAS and EAS, which takes some study time to get it, something the JREF's would be well served to do, because it looks like a circus of jokers over there laughing it up with ad hominems over something they do not even begin to understand for the life of them. It's totally convoluted.

Btw, for the south tower plane, airspeed can be calculated by factoring groundspeed with the windspeed vector, where a very light wind to the N/W would increase the airspeed slightly to about 515 knots.

This whole thing isn't a race or a competition to score a point or whatever. It's a very very serious matter requiring the utmost precision and clarity.

And btw, they will never re-open that "hoaxed" thread come hell or high water it just won't happen.


Furthermore, the work by Rob Balsamo at Pilots for 9/11 Truth is admirable, particularly when you see what he's been put through by the so-called skeptics. What i sense from you in regards to that research, information and data, is plain jealousy, which is absurd. And if you want to see the activity of tyrants, you don't need to look far. Otoh, you wouldn't believe what's tolerated over at the P4T forum.

Remember too that if you're not over the target you won't be taking much flak..

Furthermore the thing we most revile that we see in others, is simply a reflection, of ourselves, often projected.

And no i'm not indoctrinated by anyone, i'm just committed to the truth as it is no matter where it comes from, and in regards to 9/11, it's not a happy place, and i get no thrill or satisfaction whatsover from this research effort and often shed an uncontrolled and spontaneous tear even as i type. It's more of a sad duty for me than anything. I have ZERO concern with trying to associate myself with the research, because it's not about me, but about WE.



edit on 20-1-2014 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 11:53 AM
Re: CeeCee Lyles cell phone call

reply to post by NewAgeMan

I was mistaken in regards to the anticipated altitude of the aircraft for CeeCee Lyles' second call, which, as allegedly reported, could and would have taken place well beneath the critical 6-8000 ft. level, although the speed at over 500mph would still have been problematic to maintain a continuous connection.

Now i'm not so sure because, although the transponder was turned off at the time (which provides altitude data), the alleged FDR and cockpit recording, according to the OS, involves the plane making a couple of maneuvers to try to throw off the passengers as they were trying to storm the cockpit, one, a left right up and down wing movement, the other an up and down movement of the nose. Therefore at whatever altitude preceded that action by the alleged hijackers, would provide the approximate altitude for the duration of her second call to her husband. Will have to look into that - and watch that segment again to make that determination.

Then there's the content of the first call as recorded on her husband's answering machine and the style of her delivery, and then the whisper at the end.

Scroll the wiki article about half way down, right side to find the player for the first call (left on her husband's answering machine) by CeeCee Lyles.


View the second of the following three links to see the interview with her husband describing the second call, and how astonished he was that it was actually made from her cell phone.


edit on 20-1-2014 by NewAgeMan because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 12:34 PM
Pearl Harbor -plant spy in Japan military in order to stage an attack on US Soil (granted, Hawaii was brutally invaded by US not too long ago)

911- plant domestic explosives and fly military plane(s) into WTC and somehow get away with the sheeple buying the Bin Ladin story

???? - the next false flag, possibly a NUCLEAR one on us soil.. to go to war with big IRAN

XXXXX - the ultimate false flag, likely an extinction level event, to to go to war with the whole darn world, including eastern asia where 1/2 the world population lives.

Zionists banksters running the whole American war machine with your hard earned money (tax).. gotta love it!

which begs the question: why arent we all tea baggers at this point?!

posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 02:09 PM
reply to post by JuniorDisco

There was no real independant investigation to begin with.

Catastrophic Terrorism - Imagining the Transformative Event, by Philip D. Zelikow, December 1998, future Chairman of the 9/11 Commission..


They came up with THE POLICY, and then saw too it that it was implemented via a combination of LIHOP (let it happen on purpose) as it relates the hijackers and their movements and activities, to establish the narrative, and MIHOP (made it happen on purpose), and then later, after much time and pressure by the family members, thoroughly covered it up, in what was never a truly independent investigation, since the guy investigating it was the very same one who helped to imagine the "transformative, catalyzing and catastrophic event, like a new Pearl Harbor" "elements of a national policy", itself, three years prior, who's recommendation and language found it's way into fellow Neocon Dick Cheney's PNAC document, which solidified the policy in geostrategic and military terms, one year before the event itself, even as the first hijacker was entering into the country on a pre-approved and accelerated visa program.


Your faith in and loyalty to the OS, based on all available information, data and phenomenon, is woefully misplaced and misguided, and doesn't really serve what i would call a just and noble historical pursuit of truth and justice.

What the mainstream thinks is irrelevant and is subject to change as the MSM is replaced with alternative news and sources of information that isn't spoon fed and highly vetted for a dumbed down TV watching population.

As to the victims, listen very carefully to CeeCee Lyles' voicemail message left on her husband's answering machine, referenced in the post above.

Oh and watch the documentary itself.

Part Two


Part Three


posted on Jan, 20 2014 @ 03:53 PM

Heads up

Read this.

15h.) Spamming: You will not Post identical content, or snippets of identical content, to multiple threads in the discussion forums. You will also not create more than one thread for your topic, or create multiple "slightly different" threads for a single topic.

and this

15f.) Relevant Content: You will not Post messages that are clearly outside of the stated topic of any forums or disrupt a forum by deliberately posting repeated irrelevant messages or copies of identical messages (also known as "flooding").

Apply it.

Only warning.
edit on 20/1/14 by neformore because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 04:59 AM
reply to post by NewAgeMan

Yeah yeah. Keep going after Bush and Cheney for the one thing they actually didn't do. That's a worthwhile activity, for sure.

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 11:44 AM
A quote from ScepticOverlord I read somewhere :
Conspiracies were and will be solved only by analytical skeptics, not by zealous quarrelers.

Or something like that.
But the analytical part, that touched me, and that's what you all are dealing with here....

That's also the reason why I chose for ATS and not JREF.
As far as I know, JREF never comes up with anything originally, from their own skeptic 911 research, they seem to exist to attack and humiliate others, who do

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 12:00 PM
I really don't understand why so many do star an invitation to ban or kill an educational thread. If you don't like the message, leave it and go on to the next thread. But you, the star staplers, taste blood....and wait for it in tight anticipation.

Like the sheep of society. Watching the bloodshed, waiting to see youngsters and the elderly die in front of the camera.....despicable behavior, and cowardly too.
If you so much like to see your military men and woman die on camera, go and JOIN.

Just as here, join and convince with sound evidence and explanatory and educational debate, and not witty one liners that let you forget all your deep fears, let you laugh. Go see a stand-up comedian for that, this here is serious debate, about thousands of Americans that died, and millions of other fellow humans too, in the aftermath.

We have to offer the evidence, but we must not let it be tainted with the sneaky additions of false prophets.

What has happened to this website? Why the craving for witty one-liners, with no educational interest, alike your boom box or TV screen, filled with more and more childish entertainment.
Where are all the educational programs from the past?
The BBC used to air beautiful ones, where are they gone, just as the ones from PBS that were great. Discovery, NatGeo seem to be in the claws from the few media moguls left, its pure bunk nowadays.
Where's the grandness from this once so great 911-forum gone....

Mods, this is a thread about a quite interesting video film about 911, the one with the presumably latest discoveries as its content, and I'm in the process of ANALYTICALLY analyzing its 3 parts for blatant mistakes.

This whole thread till now only covers parts of Part 1 of the video......I'm on to Part 2 now.

I do it, because its narrator should be able to take this positive intended critique to heart, and produce an even more excellent production sequel, without any easy to spot failures.
I am trying to spot --any-- outdated or clearly wrong content.

So, please don't close this one too, caused by excessive flooding (from NAM, or me?).

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 12:38 PM
One of the producer's blatant mistakes in Part 1 is, that they duplicated one of the outdated PF911T flight sim videos, the one with captain Randy Aimer, who feeds far too high speeds into the flight sim computer, while "flying" inside that full circle maneuver 3 minutes before Pentagon west wall impact.
And then telling that nobody could fly this manually.

However, sure they can with the real values fed to the simulator.
But only a highly professional trained pilot can, with 10,000 hrs flight time minimum....or a remote program.

NAM, you answered SO's question just above Milt's lecture, in that other thread I linked to further on with Milt's explanation, with a new post under Milt's one, with first a YouTube video about Captain Dan Govatos, core member of Pf911T.

Our readers should watch that video from 8:00 / 9:40 on.
Captain Dan Govatos says, about how that near 360 degree full circle was REALLY flown, the following very correct and very honest things :

--snip-- How possible is it, to pull off the maneuver that Hani Hanjour apparently pulled off with flight 77, and crashed into the Pentagon?

Well, this is where you...???...comes in and it's kind of based on outdated information. A lot of people said it was just an impossible maneuver, well, that's not the case..
It exactly points to the opposite, how that maneuver was flown.
It was a very graceful, professional maneuver, it looked like someone professional was at the wheel, well within the envelope of the aircraft.
However, when he pulled out of that turn to get on that straight leg down towards the Pentagon, that...that maneuver itself, well it leaves you in (?dandruff?)....When you look at these....just by.... , when you look at these, just the yoke-movements, you can tell, somebody, who ever got those controls, is a professional, and knows how to fly this aircraft.

I advice Mr Mazzumo, producer of this excellent 3 part video series about all the glaring inconsistencies of 911, to change the Captain Randy Aimer video for the Captain Dan Govatos video.

So, we may suspect that Balsamo still did not correct that Captain Randy Aimer video, where he fed him those dishonest speeds inside that near full circle.
And that's why a great producer includes that far outdated crap theory in his excellent video series of three.
But this charlatan is the reason that so many 911 doubters believe his crap, he is using the trust of good professionals but feeds them his personal concocted pure crap, to be able to lean on them, for his call on superiority.

Please, professional pilots, do not let yourself get lured-in by this charlatan, and let your good name and reputation be pulled through the mud by him.
And that's why we must keep attacking that flock of mis believers, since they lure too many good researchers in their honey pot, and let them then waste years on wrong assumptions, as a result.

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 12:50 PM
NAM, I gave you the 2 extra diagrams above, and you still don"t get it ?
I told you to look at the resulting MACH numbers (And calculate eventual G-forces at play which brings you closer to the real dangerous Vne).
That diagram is the result of many inputs, which Balsamo's Vg diagram was not. And he introduced his own speed legenda under it, replacing the norm one, which is really "not done".
Just compare the real one from Beachnut in his OP at JREF (link provided already) with Balsamo's incorrect one.

That one seemed to show a "direct death zone" to the right, while in that zone an airframe in straight flight can still stay complete, for a long time.
The top zone however is not so forgiving, there's G-force the main player and shortens the airframe's life span considerably.
And that's what you stubbornly don't want to understand.

Last example ever :
Post by BenReclused (Milt):

posted on Jan, 7 2014 @ 20:41
reply to url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread990280/pg22#pid17401878]post by NewAgeMan[/url]

If you are prepared to "believe" that an unmodified Boeing 767 Commercial Jet can fly at 510 knots near sea level, then by extension you must also believe that it can fly, even in dive - at 722 knots at 22,000 feet... or Mach 1.19, and 915 knots at 35,000 feet...or Mach 1.38 heading for 1.39 at 38,000 ft.

That's not true, at all!

Because you seem so concerned about mach numbers, explain why you feel the aircraft should have lost it's flight worthiness before reaching it's maximum Vmo mach number (.86). At 510 knots EAS, and at 700 ft. ASL, the aircraft was only flying at mach .78.

See ya,

He shows you knots and feet.
I showed you my V diagrams, and those Mach values were lower, for the WTC 1 and Pentagon attacks. Since I used lower speeds than Milt.
The diagrams variables are in knots, or mph, or kmh, or feet, or meters.
It's the Mach values that influence the eventual fluttering!
And thus eventual airframe loss.

Your quoted answer with your assumptions in it, are wild assumptions, and you know it, since you also know that the never to exceed Mach value is 0.86.

So why you dare to use those far out of order Mach values of yours as some sort of extrapolated values for his correct calculation for a Mach = 0.78 for the WTC attack plane, is beyond my imagination.
"By extension", what a sick joke. Those are impossible examples and you know it.
Vne Mach value is 0.86, never to exceed, PERIOD.! Especially not by a hijacker who pulls the plane in a sharp turn.
But they didn't, they stayed within those still safe Mach values.

That''s why it's not so stupid to think about remotely steered empty planes, the more details get known about all flights.
Risks were taken that sincere hijackers never would have taken.
It looks more that some show-offs were at the helm of a "flight sim" somewhere in a military complex, in the middle of a modern day Northwoods scenario.

posted on Jan, 21 2014 @ 11:00 PM
Part 2 covers the Pentagon attack to about 23 minutes into the video, then the Shanksville Flight 93 event is covered for about 45 minutes into the video, and the rest of the video covers the WTC twin towers attack, no WTC 7 yet.
It's very well crafted, and no glaring mistakes to be found by me.

For any starting 911 researcher the most excellent research compendium to start with.
On to Part 3.

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 01:34 AM
Part 3 extends into the WTC twin towers and WTC 7 destruction models.
Explosions are extensively covered, with logical coverage of all scenarios known to the producer.

I miss however the thermobaric bombs subject, offered for so many years already by me.
TB's explain everything there is, and can be explained about the manner of demolition, as we saw and heard it. Just use the ATS search with the words " LaBTop thermobarics ".
Thermitic charges and high explosives can be added to the TB scenario at will, but they are not necessary.

TB's can be shape charged, or just used to blow up whole floors instantly, but without the sudden far out spitting of localized jets of material, its more as what you saw at collapse initiation in the twin towers. A sudden immense ring of dust bulging out of all windows around and on one or two floors.
And just a few flashes of light visible inside, those are the small HE charges going off (the "firecrackers" phenomenon reported), that starts or maintains the TB sequence its method of exploding-stages of the gaseous clouds.

In essence, main TB's are like blowing up a balloon, until it bursts. Only much faster than your lungs can master.
And the localized jet streams seen spitting out of windows much lower than the collapse fronts, were shape-charge-formed gaseous TB clouds, used to cut specific strong resistance spots in the core columns pack, much lower than what came racing down.

At 24:10 into Part 3 of the video, you see at 24:13 a huge BLACK smoke cloud suddenly bulging out of the top floor, the observation deck, of the North Tower, just to the right of the radio mast. And within two seconds it reaches a hundred meters up, and then the floors UNDER the impact floors burst out in WHITE smoke rings.

That were first, the small shape-charged TB's that knacked the center columns pack, and these sucked and then pushed all the internal soot and black smoke from the fires upwards through the EMPTY elevator shafts, and then secondly, the big ones were detonated which are always accompanied with thick white smoke from their immense chemical gaseous contents that are combining with water vapor in the air when they, with tremendously force, explode outwards with at least 20,000 meters per second explosive force and speed at initiation, which speed rapidly bleeds off however, that's why it is a localized "balloon blow up" effect.

The one opposite effect of a TB against a HE charge is the not localized event. A TB lasts longer, but bleeds off faster, and that's why you don't see these long HE jet streams spitting out with a MAIN TB exploding.
That you only see with a shape charged TB, used to cut specific targets.

From 24:38 on, into the video, the sound of explosions recorded by video cameras is covered.

From 33:00 to 35:06 a beautiful slow motion sequence of "looking glass" zoom-ins are shown regarding those jet streams under the collapse fronts, so-called squibs, in demolition jargon. Never seen them so clear as Mazzumo did show them here.

Then the ejecta is covered, the 1200 feet diameter circles around the center of each tower, covered with heavy and light debris. Dust however was spread enormously wider.

Gravity works vertically, not laterally says one architect, Jody Gibbs.
Not two times the width of each tower, on all sides....
AND GRAVITY YOU SAW AT WORK AT THE DEMOLITION OF THE WTC 7 TOWER, which was a bottom up demo. And thus, after the initial explosions in the 5th to 8th floors, the whole building came down nearly exactly in its own footprint, because gravity was the real force, AFTER THE MAIN THERMOBARIC EXPLOSIONS their signature are visible on the LDEO seismogram of the demolition of WTC 7.

From 36:00 to 37:50. Try to answer yourself the question David Chandler lays before you, when explaining the forces needed to hurdle such large chunks of Vierendeel outer wall column packs for such far distances.
That was for every piece the same force a canon needs to fire a 200 lb cannonball for 3 miles !

At 38:00 to 40:18 you hear evidence of diagonally beams and columns that were seen by Kevin McPadden, first responder, at 8 o'clock in the evening of 9/11/2001, tons and tons of them he says.
That was LONG BEFORE any steel workers were there to cut remaining steel with acetylene torches in the days after.
This interview is TOTALLY NEW for me, and is what I was waiting for, for a very LONG TIME already. Thank you, Mazzumo! Thank you, Infowars.

I'm halfway now, on to the last half.
This documentary is REALLY, REALLY exceptionally well composed, with all these nagging logical questions included, a real Masterpiece.

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 03:59 AM
Part 3 continued :
Then the long duration of the rubble piles fires come up.
For me, after many years of contemplating what that could have caused, I found my solution.

It's the same effect as in a big charcoal production pit in Asia or Africa I once saw.
Just Google it for videos of them, and how they construct them and maintain them, for many days to weeks, to get all the wood charred under oxygen starving conditions.

Let's see how long that takes to get duplicated by others, without ever mentioning me as the originator. I've seen in my long life, so many of my ideas getting stolen, I get used to it slowly.
In case of 911, I don't really care, since there's only one thing important :

At 0:55:00, the dust composition subject.
"Everything was pulverized".
Thermobaric bombs have one aftermath characteristic that stands out, it's the accompanying total dustification of nearly all concrete.

I posted the video of that Russian experiment long ago already, where they TB'ed one high rise huge concrete buildings structure : nothing than fine dust left afterwards, between the few coarser debris pieces. And the re-bar steel pieces of course.
Search the ATS archived pages for " LaBTop thermobaric " and you will find that video between the 300+ posts.

Note one thing in TB demolition of the twin towers. The core columns were cut first, a floor lower, then that above part of the columns sunk suddenly inside the center, pulling all those TRUSSES suddenly downwards and INWARDS, thus disrupting the outer walls, then the main TB's were ignited, blowing all those floors outwards, smashing the broken outer wall pieces hundreds of yards away.
And that will never happen with a real gravitational collapse, see the collapse period after the TB detonations in the WTC 7 tower, 47 floors high. The whole building was gliding smoothly into its own footprint, with minor debris spread outwards of that, only a few meters around that. NOT a HUNDRED YARDS AROUND THE WTC 7 FOOTPRINT.

At 1:00:00, mention of the SEVEN-HUNDRED bone fragments found on the roof of the Deutsche Bank building that was going to be demolished in 2006. From more than 1100 victims, there wasn't even any DNA found, they vanished.
How can these tiny fragments end up on that roof so far from the South Tower?
From a gravitational collapse, as NIST says? You still believe in fairy-tales too?
That can only happen from EXPLOSIVE FORCES !

1:05:00, All WTC 7 subjects. One of my expertises.
The most important part of this documentary. VIEW THAT.

The last seconds of the film, the heartbreaking plea from the first responder in 2006, who died in 2010 :


posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 04:06 AM
I see that you can contact them at :

or in English here.

for full info, other versions, updates, errors & omissions and contact.
I'm gladly gonna do that.
They deserve to get the best information from all of us.
To be able to make it even better than they did now.


edit on 22/1/14 by LaBTop because: English version added.

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 04:29 AM
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Shill alert.... trying to derail the thread ? Who gives a # if it s 11 or 19, if the topic is a different one altogether ?

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 09:14 AM
reply to post by Dynamitrios

Because it's important to get the details correct when flinging around accusations of mass murder?

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 01:27 PM
These videos are astounding. I'm currently working on my second play through.

Here's the more complete interview with Richard Clarke, in case you haven't seen it yet. They only briefly touch on it in the documentary.

posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 08:00 PM

reply to post by Dynamitrios

Because it's important to get the details correct when flinging around accusations of mass murder?

So you believe the 911 commission and NIST got the details correct?

posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 05:40 AM


reply to post by Dynamitrios

Because it's important to get the details correct when flinging around accusations of mass murder?

So you believe the 911 commission and NIST got the details correct?

Something as basic as that? Yes.

posted on Jan, 24 2014 @ 03:07 PM
Neformore, SO, NAM, choose and Milt, I found just today in NAM's "hoax" thread in page 28, an example of good forum manners and Decorum,
I've just now completed reading that page 28 from NAM's hoax thread, and that is one of the best pages in ATS 9/11 forum history! MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING, while still opposed.

So I am sorry to have bothered you with all that textual verbiage.
Everything what had to be said WAS already laid out in the spotlight in page 28.

One thing is remarkable, I followed SO's ADMIN alert advice in the OP, to proceed first to page 27 and his hoax ordeal. Then I read a few pages back, to find out what all the commotion was about.
And started reading flight forums, aeronautical pages and flight calculation pages.
Remarkably, I concluded about the same as NAM, choose and BenRecluse (Milt) combined.

So, perhaps a thought, to add these lines to that OP-admin advice text :

"To the readers, proceed to read at least page 28 in its totality, for a great example of forum decorum and manners. And my (SO) ultimate explanation why this aeronautically interesting thread ended-up in this Hoax forum. "

It's the last post on page 28 where SO explained finally why he will not re-open that thread again.
I understand his reason, after a short PM exchange yesterday with SO where I asked him to open that thread again.
But I agree partially with Milt, choose and NAM too, however also understand that forum wars are really not done, and the continuing of that thread in that form could have easily lead to such stupidity. (It got already tighter again in the last pages 29, 30 and 31.)

Much later, days after I had figured out what in my opinion was intrinsically wrong with NAM's thoughts, I started to read from page 1 and further on (now at page 4).

After at last reading all the posters their outpourings from deep down their hearts in page 28, I agree with Bill SkepticOverlord's only reason to ever open that thread again as worded there in page 28 his last post.
Only when a Boeing / FAA approved Vg (V-G) diagram turns up.

I really started to think PF911T had duplicated my posting methods and manners, and send a new Balsamo-nick to pester us.
It turns out we have a new member, NAM, who expresses the same thoughts I have and tries them to spread as honestly as possible.
And two new also well mannered opponents, choose and BenRecluse. All in all, a surprising improvement for us all.

My apologies to all I may have offended with my hastily conclusions, and for my slow picking up on the subject and the main characters.
That should suffice to end posting on that subject in this thread.

We could proceed per PM's, if some feel the need. It still is a fascinating subject. I still have meters of text typed in already, that is now not appropriate anymore for this thread.

Let's proceed again with the subject of this thread, September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor triple video series.
edit on 24/1/14 by LaBTop because: Forgot member "choose" !

new topics
top topics
<< 10  11  12   >>

log in