BREAKING NEWS: Many More than 8 People at CIT Conference

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by trebor451
Intellectually dishonest.
Admitting the acceptance of two mutually exclusive events.

In your 25 years of working for the DOD, did they ever teach you to think outside the box, trebor? It appears not. For someone who wasn't there, you're sure trying to force an opinion based on what you've been told happened.

You and jthomas both cherry-pick Boger's witness statement to suit yourselves. You both do the exact same thing that you accuse 'truthers' of doing.

Originally posted by trebor451
So. Let's try again on a different topic.
Who are the fly-over witnesses?

You need to keep up with current events, trebor. Maybe those long days working with the DOD don't allow you the time to refresh threads, like you should. Unless you only refresh the threads that you're allowed to refresh?

jthomas has already admitted that no one knows how many witnesses there were or what they would have seen, with respect to a flyover.

You were already nailed on that, tezzajw, since you know full well what I actually wrote versus what you claim I wrote. Repeating your deceit doesn't change the facts, as desperate as you are trying.

Everyone now understands your intellectual dishonesty. Flailing helplessly doesn't help you.

Now, let's be clear. ALL of the evidence from multiple independent sources converges on the inescapable conclusion that AA77 hit the Pentagon. No one has provided evidence that can refute ALL of the evidence. Either do so or admit you can't. The burden of proof still rests on the ones claiming AA77 didn't.





[edit on 16-7-2009 by jthomas]

posted by 911files
Just to clear up the issue at hand for turbo since he seems to be off on another tangent.

1) At issue is a data file, NOT an EEPROM.
2) The data file terminates at a point west of the Pentagon based on altitude correlation of the MC values recorded by the PLA and IAD radar facilities and the full set of DME data matched to the various VOR's used along the flight path.
3) Normally, the FDR records to within a second of impact and termination of the power supply. Why the data file does not contain this data is the issue at hand, NOT what may have caused the FDR to stop recording (an entirely seperate issue).
4) A lot of people have presented rational arguments suggesting why the FDR may have lost power prematurely and it is beyond my expertise to explore those. My interest is strictly the data set represented by the raw dump file and the final position recorded.
5) The final position represented by the RO2 done by P4T, and verified by the DME and altitude values in the NTSB CSV file is west of the Sheraton, a good six seconds away from the Pentagon based on last recorded speed trends.
6) The discussion of the technical aspects of the FDR (EEPROM) is for a discussion of WHY the FDR may have stopped recording prematurely. The issue is the data represented in the resultant file. I am not interested in WHY it may or may not have failed. My interest is solely in the data it recorded prior to failure.

posted by 911files
I cannot show you any data for AAL77 from the FDR past a point west of the Sheraton because it does not exist. I know that is hard for you to grasp, but I'm putting it as simple as I can.

Gee Farmer, don't you think your bluffing has gone far enough?

Obviously you don't know what you pretend to know do you?

2. Claim - The FDR Data stops/is missing 2-6 seconds of data west of the pentagon wall

FDR Recorders built to .5 sec lag maximum standard
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Radar Altitude Confirms too high
pilotsfor911truth.org...

NTSB plots aircraft 1 second away from pentagon wall.
i47.photobucket.com...

i47.photobucket.com...

American 77 Flight Recorder Position Data - DME Video
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Lat/Long/DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Putting Fdr "delay" Myth To Rest
pilotsfor911truth.org...

INS vs DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...


2a. Claim - The data file terminates at a point west of the Pentagon based on altitude correlation of the MC values recorded by the PLA and IAD radar facilities and the full set of DME data matched to the various VOR's used along the flight path.

FDR Positional/DME Data obtained from a file (RO2) which was decoded by software not intended for use with Aircraft Accident Investigation. Above claim ignores this point. Pilots For 9/11 Truth have not used RO2 for any official analysis published on our main site due to this point alone. Although, we have shown Radar Altitude from RO2 in conjunction with claims made still place the aircraft too high. See claim 3.

Above Radar data processed by a person with an extreme bias for the govt story, has made numerous math errors in the past regarding simple vector analysis and has been shown to be in error of their radar analysis. Above claimant does not know the difference between pressure and true altitude and has admitted a "large potential for human error" in his Radar plot/analysis. When invited for debate by a 3rd party moderator on above claim(s), P4T accepted, claimant refused.

"In general, the final AA77 data in the raw [radar] file differs materially from the processed file."
pilotsfor911truth.org...

"aa77" Final Approach Ground Speed Determination From The 84rades Radar Data, 84Rades and FDR data mutually INCONSISTENT?
pilotsfor911truth.org...

Altitude Correlation determined above based on primary RADES radar returns. NTSB states. "... the altitude estimates from these returns are subject to potentially large errors" when attempting to correlate primary RADES altitude data for Egypt Air 990.

Points within the RADES Data have the alleged AA77 in excess of 50,000 feet.
pilotsfor911truth.org...

RADES Altitude Data is not reliable for correlating position.

Altitude Data impossible to correlate due to inoperative Mode C.

Nav 1 DME recorded 1.5 NM off DCA VOR. The above claim ignores this point.
American 77 Flight Recorder Position Data - DME Video
pilotsfor911truth.org...

DME Slant Range errors are ignored by above claim.

Repetitive DME returns in excess of regulation intervals in RO2 ignored by above claim.

INS Errors are ignored by above claim (AA77 RO2 positional data shows aircraft departing roughly 3,000 feet south of IAD Runway 30. Illustration - www.aa77fdr.com...

INS vs DME
pilotsfor911truth.org...

See Claim 2 for more information on "missing seconds".

pilotsfor911truth.org...

[edit on 7/16/09 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


Preston, I don't care what those crack-pots at P4T have to say. The FDR terminus has been verified by multiple radar site data, video evidence and the NTSB data. It is not even in dispute from the government sources themselves.

P4T distorts and spins all evidence to fit a fly-over scenario. What they have to say does not interest me in the least, including you.

You'll just have to wait for the book. Until then, I've wasted enough time on this thread.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by 911files]

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by tezzajw
jthomas has already admitted that no one knows how many witnesses there were or what they would have seen, with respect to a flyover.

You were already nailed on that, tezzajw, since you know full well what I actually wrote versus what you claim I wrote. Repeating your deceit doesn't change the facts, as desperate as you are trying.

On the contrary, jthomas. I'm the one with the nail-gun in my hand.

You made the statements that no one has the magical power to know what witnesses would have seen. You admitted that you don't know how many witnesses there were.

After being nailed with your own words, you have ever since, been in damage control.

Everyone can clearly see how wrong you get things and the spin that you will employ to get out of it.

You cherry-pick Boger and you misrepresented the numbers at the recent CIT gathering. Your spin to suggest otherwise is quite telling.

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by tezzajw
jthomas has already admitted that no one knows how many witnesses there were or what they would have seen, with respect to a flyover.

You were already nailed on that, tezzajw, since you know full well what I actually wrote versus what you claim I wrote. Repeating your deceit doesn't change the facts, as desperate as you are trying.

On the contrary, jthomas. I'm the one with the nail-gun in my hand.

You think readers can't distinguish between what I wrote and what you claim I wrote.

And you're obsessed about it.

Gosh...

See my sig.





[edit on 16-7-2009 by jthomas]

Originally posted by tezzajw
You cherry-pick Boger and you misrepresented the numbers at the recent CIT gathering. Your spin to suggest otherwise is quite telling.

Back to the subject of this thread...how many people were there?

Originally posted by adam_zapple

Originally posted by tezzajw
You cherry-pick Boger and you misrepresented the numbers at the recent CIT gathering. Your spin to suggest otherwise is quite telling.

Back to the subject of this thread...how many people were there?

Since the CIT/PfT Team has such a difficult time answering questions, I'll try to help.

The few photos that have come out from the little soiree shows about 30 or so people. How many were strap-hangers or CiT/PfT groupies is unknown. It is kind of like a web-site counter - how many unique visitors did you have, not counting your own hits? I'm not sure we'll know. The slathering Rock Creek Press sycophant reporter probably brought a few of her officemates - or perhaps they stopped by one of the many parks in DC and gathered up some homeless winos and promised them a bottle of Boone's Farm and a pack of smokes if they came to the presentation.

Even it it WERE the north side of 30, it still seems to be a rather profound failure, at least of the CiT/PfT marketing and advertisement department, not to mention their whole idea. Nothing has happened - the earth hasn't opened to swallow any of us Evil Co-Conspirators up. In fact, the only movement on their site has been this absolutely hilarious affidavit stuff ("stuff" is the best word I can use here) that has so many errors of fact and issue that I'm not sure it was generated by someone who understood the english language, let alone US law.

So to answer your question, something around 30 based on available photos.

Originally posted by trebor451
Since the CIT/PfT Team has such a difficult time answering questions, I'll try to help.
The few photos that have come out from the little soiree shows about 30 or so people. How many were strap-hangers or CiT/PfT groupies is unknown.

I'm suprised that in your alleged 25 year career as a DOD spook, that you didn't have some undercover operatives attend the CIT conference, trebor. It's just another business trip, isn't it? They could have given you a more accurate assessment and you wouldn't have to rely on ATS for the scoop.

Afterall, CIT are probably on a covert watchlist, classed as medium level terrorists.

Originally posted by tezzajw
Afterall, CIT are probably on a covert watchlist, classed as medium level terrorists.

Man! Are you a sharp one! The sharpest in the box! We actually had to open up a complete new wing of the Echelon building to handle not only CIT but you, as well! Hired 43 new agents, all experts in covert Internet surveillance practices. We can, as you have no doubt guessed, read every key stroke you make down there. We know what web sites you visit (boy do we ever). YOU are actually one of the most important of our covert "Keep An Eye On" programs. There is a black line of accounting simply for the funding to maintain a KEYHOLE 27Bravo surveillance satellite over your house, 24/7 (launched just last month - state of the art! You deserve it).

CIT ranks just slightly below because your residence outside of the US means you are not bound by our laws and regulations - so we have to keep a closer eye on *you*.

A sharp one! Yes sir-ee!