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.
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.
Originally posted by johndoex
I dont have much time to address all of jthomas' obvious strawmans, but i'll address some of the blatant ones really quick.
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.
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.
" Pilotsfor911truth.org does not make the claim that "No Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon". We have analyzed the Flight Data Recorder data provided by the NTSB and have shown factual analysis of that data. We do not offer theory.
While we do not make this claim in these words, the analysis we present on the basis of the NTSB's own data factually contradicts the official account that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon--if trends are continued beyond end of data records--and therefore supports the inference that American Airlines Flight 77 did not hit the building based upon that data."
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...
Originally posted by johndoex
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..
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?
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
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
What's interesting is how not a single claim or quote in this entire hour and 40 minute long presentation has been cited or successfully called out as incorrect.
Boone tried the hardest but floundered.
Caustic Logic has been virtually silent.
The testimony of Steve Chaconas is pretty rock solid evidence of a military deception.
It seems like so far nobody has disagreed.
At 9:09, Langley F-16s are directed to battle stations, just based on the general situation and the breaking news, and the general developing feeling about what's going on. And at about that same time, kind of way out in the West, is when America 77, which in the meantime has turned off its transponder and turned left back toward Washington, appears back in radar coverage. And my understanding is the FAA controllers now are beginning to pick up primary skin paints on an airplane, and they don't know exactly whether that is 77, and they are asking a lot of people whether it is, including an a C-130 that is westbound toward Ohio.
Originally posted by johndoex
jthomas,
Please present one piece of evidence that positively identifies AA77 as the aircraft which caused the damage at the pentagon, which is also not controlled by the suspect, eg. US Govt agencies.
Aircraft Accident Investigators are waiting. Thank you.
Perhaps you can look up "denial" in the dictionary?
I also notice you skipped the quote made by Lee Hamilton. How convenient.
Edit to add:
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?
AA77 was never positively Identified as the object which caused the damage at the pentagon. either through parts, radar or witnesses. A witness cannot positively ID a Flight Number, unless you believe it was painted on the side.
2. Provide conclusive evidence that the wreckage is from something other than AA77 and demonstrate how it got there.
Provide the part numbers and mx logs and we'll get right on it.
3. If NOT from AA77, please provide proof of what happened to AA 77 and its passengers.
pilotsfor911truth.org...
If it flew over the Pentagon, please provide the eyewitness testimony from those on its flight path AFTER it flew over the Pentagon.
I believe CIT just did in their presentation on the OP. Did you watch it?
For the record, no one from the 9/11 Truth Movement has ever been able to answer any of these questions
For the record, i believe your research skills are poor to piss poor. Either that or you do not know how to click links.
Originally posted by Boone 870
Why would Washington departure be directing aircraft over the mall and through P56 airspace?
You are wrong again.
Care to be a man this time and admit it or are you going to deny the facts to protect your ego again?
The red line is not a placement of the C-130, it represents the southernmost boundary of P56A airspace.
I accept your red line as a more accurate placement of the C-130.
Just an estimation is the point. Your initial flight path was to far north, what keeps it from being even farther south?
But your red line still contradicts the RADES data because it is south side of The Mall and is STILL north and west just like the C-130 pilot says.....so the exact same point of the initial graphic still stands 100% even if it may be slightly too high north. Of course you can't even see The Mall in the initial graphic at all so it was just an estimation.
I've never denied the pilot statements. I've denied your interpretation of them though.
I'm glad to see that you are now willing to accept the pilot's statements of flying by the south side of The Mall and having just passed The Mall headed westbound when he first interacted with the decoy jet.
I never stated that he flew through P56, you did with your flight path. My point was that it is highly unlikely that Washington departure would have sent him through that airspace.
However....you were wrong by stating that he would have to be in P56 airspace in order to fly by the south side of The Mall as he states.
Originally posted by Boone 870
The red line is not a placement of the C-130, it represents the southernmost boundary of P56A airspace.
] Just an estimation is the point. Your initial flight path was to far north, what keeps it from being even farther south?
I've never denied the pilot statements. I've denied your interpretation of them though.
I never stated that he flew through P56, you did with your flight path. My point was that it is highly unlikely that Washington departure would have sent him through that airspace.