How did Atta's passport actually survive?

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: 2PacSade

It survived by being planted at the scene.

I've read that the person "finding" the passport was Bernie Kerik. If true, that fairly well explains it all. Staged events, planted evidence.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: 2PacSade

It survived by being planted at the scene.

I've read that the person "finding" the passport was Bernie Kerik. If true, that fairly well explains it all. Staged events, planted evidence.

Can you cite a source? Or you just being a sore looser to the fact there is credible evidence the passport could end up on the street.

More FYI from people that actual dig into the facts....

the-satam-al-suqami-passport.t2788/
www.metabunk.org...


account-of-satam-passport-discovery-by-rich-wozniak.t2887/page-2#post-152050
www.metabunk.org...-152050

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: Jesushere

How did the terrorists enter the pilot's cockpit through a locked door?

Show us where the doors had locks in 2001.
Planes and procedures are radically different post 911.

All plane cabin doors are locked to say differently is beyond idiotic. Anyone can walk in if the door was not shut after takeoff. Not even one of the four planes pilots followed the procedure and send a distress signal we are hijacked. Very suspicious all the pilots forget their training on 9/11. And of all days the Terrorists picked the day to carry out the attack when America military was incapacitated with war games simulation.

The plane got engulfed by the building. The passport had to pass the fireball of jet fuel and fly out of the building to be found on a street. There is plenty of evidence Atta was not even a devout Muslim he spends his time in bars in Florida and taking Cocaine, with his buddies very strange behaviour for a guy who supposedly following the strict doctrine of the Sunni faith. He also had white German friends who act very suspicious and have a lot of money to spend. Even the school Atta trained to fly at has a colourful past. Huffman Aviation owner was broke in 2000, a few months later he received huge sums of money to finance his operations. Remarkable or coincidence all these Saudi hijackers started showing up at his school for flight lessons about the time he got the money injection to help his business.

a reply to: Jesushere

You?

All plane cabin doors are locked to say differently is beyond idiotic.

Cite a source that all cockpit doors where locked 100 percent of the time before 9/11.

Also, aircrews before 9/11 were to comply with hijackers. Is that a false statement.

You

The plane got engulfed by the building. The passport had to pass the fireball of jet fuel and fly out of the building to be found on a street.

Again and again...

One: If the terrorists were in the cockpit, they were in front of the fuel tanks. After impact, the jet wreckage that went all the way through the tower was ejected before the fireball engulfed the tower.

Two: the passport had to have enough contact time with the flame and heat with sufficient oxygen to burn. If the passport was expelled with the wreckage that passed entirely through the tower, there would not be enough time. Fire takes heat, oxygen, the chemical reaction that is fire, and fuel.

Three: Examples of jets exploding in mid air by a bomb or a missile have been provided with numerous examples of IDs surviving with other personal items. Are you saying there was no fire balls in the provided examples?

Four: Accounts, Relics. photos, and video of wreckage in the street from the jet impacts show that items from the jets were largely char free and still recognizable. The passport was not an isolated incident.

Five: Other cases of items collect in the streets from the jets before tower collapse.

Six: Numerous IDs collected from the rubble of the towers after collapse.

Seven: what was the point of the planted passport. It was not an important part of the investigation.

Why does your arguments ignore accounts, real world cases, relics, photos, and videos? Why is it given out of context. Can you cite actual sources? Because you care more about a choose your own adventure conspiracy than logic and truth.

a reply to: neutronflux

Not only did airlines cockpits have doors that locked pre 911 - it was mandatory per FAA regulations that all cockpits doors were locked during flight. However, much stronger doors were installed after 9/11.

9/11 commisions report said this "We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight." 

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: neutronflux

Not only did airlines cockpits have doors that locked pre 911 - it was mandatory per FAA regulations that all cockpits doors were locked during flight. However, much stronger doors were installed after 9/11.

9/11 commisions report said this "We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight." 

Funny you ignored that it was policy for flight crews to comply with hijackers before 9/11. Is that a false statement.

Especially for pre 9-11? By the way. Are there bathrooms and drink machines in the cockpit. Locked during flight? So the pilots cannot leave to use the bathroom, stretch their legs, investigated a disturbance? or flight attendants could not enter to discuss topics, deliver food, or deliver coffee?

Evidently, there was a reason the cockpit doors were beefed up after 9/11. Guess there was room for improvement.

Now in the topic of this thread.

Again and again...

One: If the terrorists were in the cockpit, they were in front of the fuel tanks. After impact, the jet wreckage that went all the way through the tower was ejected before the fireball engulfed the tower.

Two: the passport had to have enough contact time with the flame and heat with sufficient oxygen to burn. If the passport was expelled with the wreckage that passed entirely through the tower, there would not be enough time. Fire takes heat, oxygen, the chemical reaction that is fire, and fuel.

Three: Examples of jets exploding in mid air by a bomb or a missile have been provided with numerous examples of IDs surviving with other personal items. Are you saying there was no fire balls in the provided examples?

Four: Accounts, Relics. photos, and video of wreckage in the street from the jet impacts show that items from the jets were largely char free and still recognizable. The passport was not an isolated incident.

Five: Other cases of items collect in the streets from the jets before tower collapse.

Six: Numerous IDs collected from the rubble of the towers after collapse.

Seven: what was the point of the planted passport. It was not an important part of the investigation.

Why does your arguments ignore accounts, real world cases, relics, photos, and videos? Why is it given out of context. Can you cite actual sources? Because you care more about a choose your own adventure conspiracy than logic and truth.

Not only did airlines cockpits have doors that locked pre 911 - it was mandatory per FAA regulations that all cockpits doors were locked during flight. However, much stronger doors were installed after 9/11.

a reply to: kyleplatinum

Wrong - I remember flying prior to 9/11 and seeing that the cockpit doors were not always closed and locked

Flight attendants had the keys, known as the "BOEING KEY"

Usually in the possession of the senior flight attendants/crew leaders

Hijackers would have known this and targeted the crew members with keys - several flight attendants were the first
ones attacked on 9/11

Also about 15 minutes after takeoff flight attendant would enter the cockpit see if pilots wanted coffee or anything to eat

Sometimes had "secret knocks" to alert pilots to open the doors - another avenue of entering the cockpit

What did those poor flight attendants do if they were flying aboard something other than a Boeing?

Did they also have a "Douglas Key"? Or a "Convair Key"?

Such nonsense is necessary when defending a fantasy story. LOL

a reply to: Salander

What did those poor flight attendants do if they were flying aboard something other than a Boeing?

Did they also have a "Douglas Key"? Or a "Convair Key"?

You are being obtuse.
They are certified for certain type aircraft.
Plus chances are that all the keys for United 757's are identical.

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: neutronflux

Not only did airlines cockpits have doors that locked pre 911 - it was mandatory per FAA regulations that all cockpits doors were locked during flight. However, much stronger doors were installed after 9/11.

9/11 commisions report said this "We do not know exactly how the hijackers gained access to the cockpit; FAA rules required that the doors remain closed and locked during flight." 

Exactly even the 9/11 commission was puzzled how this happened. The pilots even forget to send the distress code. If the hijackers took over a plane the passengers will be screaming and panicking loudly, the pilots will have heard the noise and followed procedure. Nobody has done a background check on the pilots flying those planes, have they?

a reply to: Jesushere

You will not answer if it’s true that air crews would usually comply with hijackers pre 9/11. Several logical accounts how the hijackers could enter the cockpit have been given. Examples of artifacts not in the cockpit of the WTC jets, and other famous crashes, that survived to be recognizable have been given. So the cockpit argument is a moot point now.


What does this give to with the topic ofvthe thread?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I want to hear critical points to prove a collaborative theory on how Atta's passport was found a few blocks from the crash. . .

Now in the topic of this thread.

Again and again...

One: If the terrorists were in first class they were in front of the fuel tanks. After impact, the jet wreckage that went all the way through the tower was ejected before the fireball engulfed the tower.

Two: the passport had to have enough contact time with the flame and heat with sufficient oxygen to burn. If the passport was expelled with the wreckage that passed entirely through the tower, there would not be enough time. Fire takes heat, oxygen, the chemical reaction that is fire, and fuel.

Three: Examples of jets exploding in mid air by a bomb or a missile have been provided with numerous examples of IDs surviving with other personal items. Are you saying there was no fire balls in the provided examples?

Four: Accounts, Relics. photos, and video of wreckage in the street from the jet impacts show that items from the jets were largely char free and still recognizable. The passport was not an isolated incident.

Five: Other cases of items collect in the streets from the jets before tower collapse.

Six: Numerous IDs collected from the rubble of the towers after collapse.

Seven: what was the point of the planted passport. It was not an important part of the investigation.

Why does your arguments ignore accounts, real world cases, relics, photos, and videos? Why is it given out of context. Can you cite actual sources? Because you care more about a choose your own adventure conspiracy than logic and truth.

a reply to: Salander

What did those poor flight attendants do if they were flying aboard something other than a Boeing?

Yo numb nutz ,,,,,, Don't be stupid.....

The hijackers specifically chose flights with Boeing 757/767 aircraft because of the commonality through the
airline industry, similarity of flight controls on the models

They had taken practice flights in the weeks before, observing actions of passengers and flight attendants - no doubt
to identify which may be holding the keys

The industry "bible" known as OFFICAL ARLINZE GUIDE (OAG) lists all scheduled airline, flights, departure and arrival
times and TYPE OF AIRCRAFT USED ON FLIGHT

The OAG was published several times a year, now is on the internet

So would have know which flights used Boeing aircraft....

originally posted by: Salander

Such nonsense is necessary when defending a fantasy story. LOL

When is the last time you cited a source, photo evidence, video evidence, or provided a fact supported by science? You are the one in the realm of fantasy. What is your pet theory on what brought down the buildings at the WTC? Based on what facts and science of nuclear devices?

a reply to: samkent


You are being credulous indeed. There were no hijackings that day, the cell phone calls were counterfeit.

I know what you mean about commonality of keys, and I was only joking in that post.

It would be fascinating to know what ever did happen to "the passengers", but most of us will never know.

a reply to: firerescue


Man alive, you sound like you were involved in the planning. That's a lot of material to remember. Pretty cool they had that Boeing manual in the back seat of their rental car, eh? And the requisite Koran, of course. A complete story.

Trouble is, too many facts contradict the story.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: samkent


You are being credulous indeed. There were no hijackings that day, the cell phone calls were counterfeit.

I know what you mean about commonality of keys, and I was only joking in that post.

It would be fascinating to know what ever did happen to "the passengers", but most of us will never know.

You cannot cite specific evidence related to the topic of this thread, so you result to going in to broad off topic speculation. Isn’t that one of the rules you cite on how to push a false narrative?

I think I have asked you in a thread or two to debunk the DNA evidence recovered at the WTC that proved the terrorists ended up at the WTC, the financial records of the terrorists that show they bought tickets, phone calls and other evidence they bought tickets, and the evidence/accounts they checked in and boarded the jets.

And what elevations were the cell phone calls made to make it impossible. And what proof do you have the air phones were physically removed and not working on the flights.

Oh? How many times do you say that government is a liar? Are you talking about the phone call from the lady supposedly the FBI could not verify? Verify is different than no proof. And that lady supposedly was working on exposing government wrongdoing? A phone call from a flight other people received phone calls from? Funny you never give context?

Phone calls that operators and other persons attest too.

For the air phones. If I remember right, you only have innuendo and an account from a pilot that would know nothing concerning the maintenance records for any give jet in the fleet?

And you still have the thread specific:


Again and again...

One: If the terrorists were in first class they were in front of the fuel tanks. After impact, the jet wreckage that went all the way through the tower was ejected before the fireball engulfed the tower.

Two: the passport had to have enough contact time with the flame and heat with sufficient oxygen to burn. If the passport was expelled with the wreckage that passed entirely through the tower, there would not be enough time. Fire takes heat, oxygen, the chemical reaction that is fire, and fuel.

Three: Examples of jets exploding in mid air by a bomb or a missile have been provided with numerous examples of IDs surviving with other personal items. Are you saying there was no fire balls in the provided examples?

Four: Accounts, Relics. photos, and video of wreckage in the street from the jet impacts show that items from the jets were largely char free and still recognizable. The passport was not an isolated incident.

Five: Other cases of items collect in the streets from the jets before tower collapse.

Six: Numerous IDs collected from the rubble of the towers after collapse.

Seven: what was the point of the planted passport. It was not an important part of the investigation.

Why does your arguments ignore accounts, real world cases, relics, photos, and videos? Why is it given out of context. Can you cite actual sources? Because you care more about a choose your own adventure conspiracy than logic and truth.

a reply to: neutronflux

One: Do we know that they had carryon luggage or whether they kept their passports on their person, or in that luggage?

I'm assuming any carryon luggage would have been the under-the-seat variety, and easy to access, especially if weapons or fake bombs, or whatever they were reported to have used were kept in it. Are you assuming it was stowed overhead? You keep citing wreckage ejected from the tower and I'm just wondering to which wreckage you're referring to, the overhead bins?

Was the passport discovered on the same side of the towers the wreckage you're referring to was ejected to or did it travel? If it traveled was it able to do so because the luggage/container it was in was destroyed around it, freeing it to fly on the wind? How did it avoid the same fate as whatever contained it (luggage/bag)?

a reply to: CajunMetal


They cannot prove even that it was AA11 or UA 175, much less who was carrying what baggage and so forth. The cell phone calls were impossible in 2001. The whole story is a hoax. Yes, the towers came down and people died, but the details are impossible.

I can only wonder why some people are so determined to push the official version on this topic, it's not as if they wouldn't just shrug and think " that's 'your' story, I have mine , forget about it ". But no, time and again Mythbusters and Co. pop in and keep hammering their version down everybody's throats. What is the motive, why go to these lengths to enforce your POV ? Once or twice, yeah, I get that, but to repeatedly join conspiracy discussion threads on a conspiracy/secret site with the sole intention of 'debunking' others views smacks of ulterior motive.
Now who would do that?

a reply to: Fermy

Because if you let stupidity fester it starts to stink worse than sewage plant.