New full feature presentation from CIT now realeased!

Originally posted by Boone 870

That's where you're wrong, it has everything to do with it. You are claiming that Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien was duped by the massive military deception because you believe that the military was included in the national ground stop.

That is not my claim at all.

That is just one of the suspicious factors.

The fact that they were not even informed that the nation was under attack or that there was an unprecedented national ground stop implemented 6 minutes prior is STILL suspicious even if military flights weren't included.

But they were.

Be a man Boone.

It's all about the details Craig. ''North and West'' is the perfect example. Speaking of that, is 270° considered West, yes or no?

I fail to see the relevance of your question.

O'Brien says he traveled NORTH and west to the south side of The Mall, not westSOUTHwest to the south side of Reagan. Big difference.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

I fail to see the relevance of your question.

O'Brien says he traveled NORTH and west to the south side of The Mall, not westSOUTHwest to the south side of Reagan. Big difference.

Given that AA 77 hit the Pentagon, what is your point?

Originally posted by jthomas

Given that AA 77 hit the Pentagon, what is your point?

My point was actually in regards to the true flight path of the C-130 as described by the pilot Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien.

But thanks for the bump!

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by jthomas

Given that AA 77 hit the Pentagon, what is your point?

My point was actually in regards to the true flight path of the C-130 as described by the pilot Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien.

But thanks for the bump!

The RADAR track of the C-130 and what O'Brien said are the same. Took off to the north and turned to the west. Pilots talk this way, and he an I both have over 20 to 34 years of flying.

Ask O'Brien and he will tell you. And all the evidence falls in place with the C-130 crew statements perfectly.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by jthomas

Given that AA 77 hit the Pentagon, what is your point?

My point was actually in regards to the true flight path of the C-130 as described by the pilot Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien.

But thanks for the bump!

At least you now admit AA77 hit the Pentagon, Craig.

Now you can dump your website.

Originally posted by beachnut

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by jthomas

Given that AA 77 hit the Pentagon, what is your point?

My point was actually in regards to the true flight path of the C-130 as described by the pilot Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien.

But thanks for the bump!

The RADAR track of the C-130 and what O'Brien said are the same. Took off to the north and turned to the west.

We did ask O'Brien.

That's not what he said.

He said he TRAVELED north and west to the south side of the Mall.

And guess what?

The Mall is northwest of Andrews!


He was right!!

An excellent collection of photos of the wreckage of AA77 after it crashed into the Pentagon:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

One has to wonder why Craig Ranke thinks Boeing 757 wreckage can fly over the Pentagon.

Weird.

reply to post by jthomas


JT you need to know that the perps were involved in the planting of the evidence...

Right after the bombs went off (per Craig, the civilian contractors planted them) They ran to the storage facility within the Pentagon and started running everywhere planting the plane parts and charred bodies.

Oh, lets not forget the mini bombs that took down all the light poles on the highway.

Shoot... then the perps had to doctor the two tapes that were confiscated, and get a hold of all the 911 tapes that may have said someone saw the plane fly OVER the pentagon.

Good stuff

reply to post by jthomas


I checked out the pics. Same pics as always, does this account for 200,000 pound aircraft? Where's the rest of the plane?

How much of the aircraft was recovered? 60%? 70% 90%?

spelling

[edit on 3/2/2008 by infinityoreilly]

The fact that the plane came from east of the river is the new smoking gun proving a military deception and Steve Chaconas breaks the case wide open.

Not quite. A stone's throw from the Pentagon, is Reagan National. Contrary to Craig's belief, Flight 77, the E4B, and the C-130 were not the only aircraft in the air over DC that day. Neither were they the only airplanes that would be circling in to make a landing. Several aircraft were landing and taking off from Reagan in that time frame including American Airlines flight 430 coming in from O'Hare. NOW did any of your "witnesses" actually read the registry number and KNOW it was Flight 77 they were seeing and not another airliner?

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
reply to post by jthomas

 

I checked out the pics. Same pics as always, does this account for 200,000 pound aircraft? Where's the rest of the plane?

How much of the aircraft was recovered? 60%? 70% 90%?

If you recall, I have persisted for months in asking Craig Ranke what those 1,000 plus people who saw and/or recovered the wreckage reported, but Craig absolutely, against all reason, REFUSES to tell us. After all, doesn't Craig want to know the truth?

And he claims he's an on-the-scene investigator? Go figure.

Maybe Craig will tell you why he refuses to report what those 1,000+ people recovered, do you think? Ask him and see if you get a straight answer. It really is strange he won't answer questions about his research.

Originally posted by infinityoreilly
reply to post by jthomas

 

I checked out the pics. Same pics as always, does this account for 200,000 pound aircraft? Where's the rest of the plane?

How much of the aircraft was recovered? 60%? 70% 90%?

If you recall, I have persisted for months in asking Craig Ranke what those 1,000 plus people who saw and/or recovered the wreckage reported but he absolutely, against all reason, REFUSES to tell us. After all, doesn't Craig want to know the truth?

And he claims he's an on-the-scene investigator? Go figure.

Maybe Craig will tell you why he refuses to report what those 1,000+ people recovered, do you think? Ask him and see if you get a straight answer. It really is strange he won't answer.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

NOW did any of your "witnesses" actually read the registry number and KNOW it was Flight 77 they were seeing and not another airliner?

We know from the overwhelming convergence and preponderance of evidence that AA 77 crashed into the Pentagon.

That was known conclusively within a half-hour of the crash.



[edit on 2-3-2008 by jthomas]

Ok megavideo is hosting the divx version for us and the quality is MUCH better than google.

The compression doesn't alter the timing of the sound either.

I highly recommend everyone re-watches it here and if you spread it around use this link:

The Pentagon Flyover - How They Pulled it Off

Click here to learn more about this warning.

Originally posted by jthomas
An excellent collection of photos of the wreckage of AA77 after it crashed into the Pentagon:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

One has to wonder why Craig Ranke thinks Boeing 757 wreckage can fly over the Pentagon.

Weird.

You claim those pieces are from AA77. Great, that must mean you have the part/serial numbers to match with Maintenance logs? Please provide them as we been trying to get just that through the FOIA. It seems the US Govt prefers to use unlawful excuse in refusing to provide such information.

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Thanks in advance for providing Part/Serial numbers to establish proof of your claims that those parts in fact came from AA77, N644AA.

Regards,
Rob

typo

[edit on 3-3-2008 by johndoex]

reply to post by johndoex



I have heard this as well, is it true that none of the wreckage was matched back to flight 77? As in the serial numbers. Do you know of any other cases in aviation where something like this occurred?

Originally posted by talisman

As in the serial numbers. Do you know of any other cases in aviation where something like this occurred?

Its unprecedented.

From our article... and fully sourced.

A recent article published by Aidan Monaghan regarding the mysterious absence of "Black Box" serial numbers for the 9/11 Flights -- where the recorders were reportedly recovered -- reveals unprecedented events in reporting. Aidan sources many situations where "Black Box" serial numbers are reported among past high profile, major aviation accidents, including those under the jurisdiction of the FBI, setting precedent. US Government agencies have refused (apparently giving unlawful excuse) to provide serial/part numbers via the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) in order to establish positive identification of the aircraft reportedly involved on September 11, 2001. Think CNN, Fox or any other Mainstream Media outlet will cover such such blatant disregard for exposing the truth?

This just pertains to the Black Boxes, but none of the parts from any of the 4 aircraft reportedly used on 9/11 have been positively identified as coming from the aircraft reported on 9/11. When attempting to get such information via FOIA, the US Govt has refused, giving unlawful excuse. All sources, FOIA requests, refusals.. etc.. can be found through above links.

Regards,
Rob


fixed link.


[edit on 3-3-2008 by johndoex]

Originally posted by johndoex

Originally posted by jthomas
An excellent collection of photos of the wreckage of AA77 after it crashed into the Pentagon:

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

One has to wonder why Craig Ranke thinks Boeing 757 wreckage can fly over the Pentagon.

Weird.

You claim those pieces are from AA77. Great, that must mean you have the part/serial numbers to match with Maintenance logs?

Actually, it means absolutely nothing at all. I assure you that never in the history of aviation crashes have rescuers and recovery personnel needed to look at serial numbers on wreckage to confirm from what flight and aircraft it came from. Not one. Ever. They rely on all the evidence to tell them.

It is patently absurd to claim that because one does not have serial numbers from the wreckage - or that a FOIA request for them is not honored - that there is therefore no other evidence that it was from AA77. This claim of your movement makes rational people shakes their heads in disbelief.

No investigation in the entire world would ever state, as you do, that it is permissible to discard all the evidence. The convergence of all the evidence about AA77 demonstrates that AA77 hit the Pentagon. It is your responsibility to refute that evidence and none of you ever has. In fact, as you have seen here, the 9/11 Truth Movement refuses to discuss the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon.

Do you now understand that?

Thanks in advance for providing Part/Serial numbers to establish proof of your claims that those parts in fact came from AA77, N644AA.

Sorry, that attempt tho shift the burden of proof from you does not work. As you well know, I have to do nothing. The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate the wreckage is NOT from AA77 as you claim. In order to do that you must:

1. Refute all of the overwhelming evidence that it was AA77 that hit the Pentagon. Please include the statements from the 1,000 people who saw and/or removed the wreckage. What did they state the wreckage was?

2. Provide conclusive evidence that the wreckage is from something other than AA77 and demonstrate how it got there.

3. If NOT from AA77, please provide proof of what happened to AA 77 and its passengers. If it flew over the Pentagon, please provide the eyewitness testimony from those on its flight path AFTER it flew over the Pentagon.

For the record, no one from the 9/11 Truth Movement has ever been able to answer any of these questions, and the hundreds more that result from your claims, in the six years we have been asking for your evidence and proof.

Just to remind you once again, the burden of proof is on you. Just when are you going to get around to it?

I dont have much time to address all of jthomas' obvious strawmans, but i'll address some of the blatant ones really quick.

Originally posted by jthomas
Actually, it means absolutely nothing at all. I assure you that never in the history of aviation crashes have rescuers and recovery personnel needed to look at serial numbers on wreckage to confirm from what flight and aircraft it came from. Not one. Ever.

Correct. Rescue and recovery cannot determine positive ID. However, you continue to use them in your strawmans. Why is that? Aircraft Accident Investigators determine positive id. If you need a few to educate you on how it works, we have several in our organization, or you can email the NTSB, or you can just click links to what the NTSB has said and shown as precedent. Or not... but others will.

It is patently absurd to claim that because one does not have serial numbers from the wreckage - or that a FOIA request for them is not honored - that there is therefore no other evidence that it was from AA77. This claim of your movement makes rational people shakes their heads in disbelief.

All these people must be irrational. Why are the lists growing?

pilotsfor911truth.org...
patriotsquestion911.com...

Keep an eye out for more. We just picked up an "Irrational CEO" from an Aviation Corporation and a few other professionals in command positions. Who of course are "irrational", according to jthomas.

No investigation in the entire world would ever state, as you do, that it is permissible to discard all the evidence.

We said that? Where? Please be sure to quote it from the exact page at pilotsfor911truth.org.... Thanks!

The convergence of all the evidence about AA77 demonstrates that AA77 hit the Pentagon.

Again, it appears you do not know what positive identification means or how it is established. If you need help, we do have a member who taught aircraft accident investigation at one of the premier Aviation Universities in the country. Let me know if you need a lesson or two. It might cost you though.

The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate the wreckage is NOT from AA77 as you claim.

Any one of you other "critical thinkers" want to explain to jthomas how you cannot "prove a negative"? Im sure you'll probably ignore this one, as he is on your side. But you sure love to use it when it works for you. Right? At the risk of straying off topic.. I'll give you an example of "critical thinkers" using the same logic...

Truther - "Prove the WTC was NOT a controlled demo".
"Duh-Bunker" - You can not prove a negative Troofer!

First, please quote from pilotsfor911truth.org... where we claim the "wreckage is not from AA77". I'll give you a hint, we dont Mr Strawman. The US Govt has claimed the wreckage is from AA77. You blindly believe them..Numerous Accident Investigators, Aviation professionals, FDR Experts etc do not.... the lists are growing...


You seem to blindly follow a govt known for corruption, spin and lies and cover-ups. We require proof of their claims. It is up to the US Govt to prove their claims. So far the US govt refuses, providing unlawful excuse. This doesnt seem to concern you too much. Why is that jthomas? Oh, thats right.. the rest of us are just all "irrational"... according to you.

Back to the original question(s). jthomas, you cannot establish postive ID of the parts. We uinderstand. Thanks for your participation.

Ok, that was enough fun for this post.. have a nice day..

"We were set up to fail... alot of people have things to hide... over 100 people!" - Lee Hamilton - Co-Chair, 9/11 Commission.

typo

[edit on 4-3-2008 by johndoex]