ACARS Confirms 9/11 UA 175 Aircraft Was Airborne Long After Crash! Just WOW!

Rob Balsamo's "eggspurt" on the case:

The fact that there are no DLBLK blocks after 9:50 EDT in the logs provided by Stutt does not surprise me. Probably they were knowingly removed before releasing the paper. Of course, this is just my speculation. However it is also the most logical conclusion.

Source

As always... it's all fake.

Originally posted by snowcrash911
Rob Balsamo's "eggspurt" on the case:

The fact that there are no DLBLK blocks after 9:50 EDT in the logs provided by Stutt does not surprise me. Probably they were knowingly removed before releasing the paper. Of course, this is just my speculation. However it is also the most logical conclusion.

Source

As always... it's all fake.

And of course, "Capt" Bob Balsamo's Opening Introduction, UNDERLINED even! states"

We do not offer theory or point blame

Seems to me "speculation" could...just *could* fall under an "offer theory" rubric, but hey...that's just me! "Capt" Bob Balsamo likes to highlight that every once in a while, just to maintain an illusion of legitimacy.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by bubs49

 

Oh dear......the "just click here" in that post is a hyperlink to another silly "P4T" thread...

Oh, the "shame, the shame"!!! Or, the "Pain, the pain".....

Relax, ProudBird. I just posted a link. Is it forbidden to link to P4T while you and others post links to Warren Stutt's pages or documents all the time?

For the records, I guess you did not bother to read the multiple objections made on Statt's claim on ACARS on P4T. Stutt is quite desperate, he thought that the BepStnName was the routing RGS and he was proven completely wrong. He cried for help at JREF, but apparently they know less about ACARS than he does himself.

Anyway, you and snowcrash don't even understand those implications. For you it makes basically no difference whether ACARS are routed based on flight plan, based on tracker messages or whatever. Every theory is welcome provided it leads to the only conclusion you admit. gman? Stutt? LaBTop? My grandma? No problem, whatever source is OK, every moment is good to libel and defame other people.

Sad guys!

So..we're dealing with a "global" conspiracy which managed it to photoshop and CGI-edit all those planes into countless footage from news station(s)..which we saw LIVE in TV....and they also managed it to photo-shop (after the fact) all the other, privately shot footage making us fool what we see is planes?

To be honest...if you were a marketer trying to SELL this to me i wouldn't buy it because this is simply logically not possible

Furthermore i would be interested where the plane actually "went" since you say it was still "airborne" after the crash...so it disappeared into thin air or what?

And you wonder why "normal" people cannot believe such logic?

Originally posted by bubs49

Sad guys!

Question: How many g's does it take to activate an audible signal in the aircraft that nobody can hear nor can say actually sounded?

Answer: *Not* 11.2 g's.

Originally posted by flexy123

Furthermore i would be interested where the plane actually "went" since you say it was still "airborne" after the crash...so it disappeared into thin air or what?

Not only "still airborne", but with a Sooper-Secret CIA/Jooish crew that would be loaded with enough stoopid to acknowledge an ACARS message sent to them, all this right after they were willing,.. nay...*prime*!...participants in one of the largest mass murders in history.

Ari: "We got away scott free! They never even saw us - good thing those CGI Holograms worked and the Judy Woods Dustification Machine took care of the evidence!"

Lev: "Yes!!! Wait....what is that....an ACARS message from United Headquarters! Let's acknowledge it, that way we'll muddy the waters even further! Mwahahahaha!!!!!'

Now THAT'S entertainment!

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by flexy123

Furthermore i would be interested where the plane actually "went" since you say it was still "airborne" after the crash...so it disappeared into thin air or what?

Not only "still airborne", but with a Sooper-Secret CIA/Jooish crew that would be loaded with enough stoopid to acknowledge an ACARS message sent to them, all this right after they were willing,.. nay...*prime*!...participants in one of the largest mass murders in history.

Ari: "We got away scott free! They never even saw us - good thing those CGI Holograms worked and the Judy Woods Dustification Machine took care of the evidence!"

Lev: "Yes!!! Wait....what is that....an ACARS message from United Headquarters! Let's acknowledge it, that way we'll muddy the waters even further! Mwahahahaha!!!!!'

Now THAT'S entertainment!

Trebor, you have obviously lost your mind.

Your posts have now become more than painful and unbearable to read.

Do you really think that everybody coming to ATS are nothing but imbeciles!

Either get a grip on yourself, or stop posting. ATS is NOT a kindergarden.


Cheers

Originally posted by djeminy
ATS is NOT a kindergarden.

Cheers

Then get together with"Capt" Bob Balsamo and the CIT twins and stop posting infantile and incredibly stupid and childish prattle and speculation that nobody anywhere with a sane or mature mind would believe.

Originally posted by bubs49
Anyway, you and snowcrash don't even understand those implications. For you it makes basically no difference whether ACARS are routed based on flight plan, based on tracker messages or whatever. Every theory is welcome provided it leads to the only conclusion you admit. gman? Stutt? LaBTop? My grandma? No problem, whatever source is OK, every moment is good to libel and defame other people.

Sad guys!

Yes, truly sad:

The fact that there are no DLBLK blocks after 9:50 EDT in the logs provided by Stutt does not surprise me. Probably they were knowingly removed before releasing the paper. Of course, this is just my speculation. However it is also the most logical conclusion.

Source

It's sad when you have to resort to fanciful speculation to plug the gaping holes in your own argument.

It's sad when you have a rap sheet of lies, slander, deception, incompetence, half truths, errors, personal attacks and power abuse on your own forum, and still come back every six months with another half-baked canard, to keep the gravy train going.

It's sad to see Robert Balsamo talk about a traceroute as if he understands TCP/IP. (ICMP, in fact) It's sad to see Balsamo talk about Warren Stutt's FDR decoder as if he understands IT, when the commentary by him and OneSliceShort is so digitally illiterate, you'd want them to sign up for an introductory computer course just to at least iron out the toe-curling wannabe IT expert commentary. Have they ever reverse engineered machine code? Manipulated netfilter tables? Configured stateful inspection modules? Parsed packet dumps? Programmed dynamic firewall rulesets? Have they ever compiled anything in their life? Composed a regular expression with backrefs or zero width lookahead assertions and character classes? Went bug hunting for errors in the source code of boot loaders like Grub? Patched a kernel? Submitted anything to SVN, GIT, or used Darcs or Trac? Ever did low-level hardware programming? Have they even ever created something as moronically simple as an Office macro? I know more about flying than they do about IT, that's a certainty.

Tracking messages... were they even enabled for UA 175? You see, the article cited offers help installing it, it doesn't claim it's installed by default. Could somebody clear that up for me? Frankly I've got better things to do right now. I'm sure P4T are motivated to make their case beyond the pitiful display of appealing to authority, censorship of credible dissent, insinuations of data manipulation and promoting speculation as fact.

Originally posted by snowcrash911
It's sad when you have to resort to fanciful speculation to plug the gaping holes in your own argument.

It's sad when you have a rap sheet of lies, slander, deception, incompetence, half truths, errors, personal attacks and power abuse on your own forum, and still come back every six months with another half-baked canard, to keep the gravy train going.

This sums up Pilots For 9/11 Truth perfectly. Bob Balsamo is a complete charlatan. He's not even a good one. He needs to take some tips from Box Boy Gage. At least that Gage can make a living off of Truther $$. (although Gage is struggling to make money for his editing and was forced to extend his deadline by a month)

Folks, it's over. Somebody went and actually bought the technical ACARS specifications.

booNyzarC's definitive P4T rebuttal

I would like to see some accountability on the part of P4T for spreading another outrageous lie under the rubric of "9/11 Truth".

Because this is not going to be another "let's move on to the next anomaly and hope they'll forget" gambit. No way.

Who in that ghastly organization is going to show some spine, dump their P4T forum account and leave in protest? Not to please any "debunkers", but for the sake of integrity, sincerity and plain old self-respect?

Quoting booNyzarC:

I look forward to the hand waiving and non-definitive responses that Balsamo and crew are sure to respond with. Or perhaps one or two of them will surprise me and acknowledge their error. Will Balsamo do the right thing and remove the proven misinformation from his web site? Time will tell, but I'm not holding my breath.

Originally posted by snowcrash911
Folks, it's over. Somebody went and actually bought the technical ACARS specifications.

booNyzarC's definitive P4T rebuttal

I would like to see some accountability on the part of P4T for spreading another outrageous lie under the rubric of "9/11 Truth".

Because this is not going to be another "let's move on to the next anomaly and hope they'll forget" gambit. No way.

Who in that ghastly organization is going to show some spine, dump their P4T forum account and leave in protest? Not to please any "debunkers", but for the sake of integrity, sincerity and plain old self-respect?

I was wondering. There isn't much in any sort of original thought going on over at "Capt" Bob Balsamo's tree fort, PfT, aside from the usual slavish sucking up by his sycophantic automatrons and his personal socks - and the usual speculation - "I think it was deleted..." and "I don't trust so-and-so". No doubt "Capt" Bob and his Top Lieutenants (Can an "F Troop" have Lieutenants? First Lieutenants, then) are burning the morning/noon/night/midnight oil trying to spin this one. It'll be fun to see how he treats his opening post on this issue, "IT IS CONCLUSIVE - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE WELL AFTER CRASH"

My opinion? They'll start to ignore this one, acknowledge nothing and move on to the next anomaly they can inflate into The Next Smoking Gun!!!11!@ - in fact, it looks like they already found one - a screwed up hijack IFF code that supposedly was set in AA flight 189.

What are the chances "Capt" Bob has some old Nippon samurai in him and he'll do the honorable thing? There's the answer right there...."Capt" Bob and "honorable" - never the twain shall meet.

reply to post by trebor451


First, he'll demand to see a resume and personal information for booNyzarC.

Then, he'll summarize how many new pilots have joined his organization, how well they all get along under Balsamo's North Korean conversation control and how this increases their credibility.

Then, he'll construct an illegible paragraph full of acronyms and obscure jargon, followed by a few sarcastic jabs, intended to underline his unchallenged supremacy in the field of sciolism.

Then, he'll attempt to change the subject, rehash some old half-baked canards, and pretend the jury is still out on that one.

Then, he'll ridicule, personally attack, threaten, viciously defame and attempt to intimidate his much stronger opponents.

Finally, he'll gild the pill with some bad jokes, move the goal posts, and ban his detractors from his kingdom... err forum.

Wait till the dust settles, lay low for a few months, then register a flock of new sock puppets on a plethora of good forums, purporting to be an "interested well-meaning truth seeker".

When confronted with past missteps, outrageous blunders, spin, obfuscation and lies; ignore and deflect.

Rinse and repeat. Rob Balsamo.

Originally posted by trebor451
What are the chances "Capt" Bob has some old Nippon samurai in him and he'll do the honorable thing? There's the answer right there...."Capt" Bob and "honorable" - never the twain shall meet.

You're close... think of "divine wind".

神風

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by trebor451
What are the chances "Capt" Bob has some old Nippon samurai in him and he'll do the honorable thing? There's the answer right there...."Capt" Bob and "honorable" - never the twain shall meet.

You're close... think of "divine wind".

神風

edit on 17-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)

It is funny, though. Where did Wetblanky and Bubs49 and ThePostExaminer go? Surely its not a coincidence that when such definitive proof is established that they are as screwed up as Hogan's goat - as right as a soup sandwich and as clear as a football bat - all 3 of them disappear. You'd think perhaps they don't have an answer to all this.

"Divine" wind is not the kind of wind I think of when "Capt" Bob Balsamo's name is mentioned.

Originally posted by trebor451
It is funny, though. Where did Wetblanky and Bubs49 and ThePostExaminer go? Surely its not a coincidence that when such definitive proof is established that they are as screwed up as Hogan's goat - as right as a soup sandwich and as clear as a football bat - all 3 of them disappear. You'd think perhaps they don't have an answer to all this.

"Divine" wind is not the kind of wind I think of when "Capt" Bob Balsamo's name is mentioned.

When the bird hits the ship... as divine as pea soup.

They'll be playing the dodgeridoo and pretending their cretinous questions need answering; they don't. They must present flyover witnesses... en masse. Or go away.

This is called ---> Burden Of Proof

But... they'll probably settle for hit-and-run style defeat denials, and inspirationless script reading. There might be a sorrowed soul among their ranks capable of mustering a meaningless, vapid non-apology apology.... Who knows.

This is in short the heart of the matter, as found in the original ARINC ACARS Manual, bought with hard money, by this poster, from ARINC.

Post by booNyzarC at Unexplained Mysteries forum thread :
"The 9/11 Planes and the Pentagon attack" :

Post #1759
The DSP (ARINC) makes use of the location downlinks referred to in previous documents to keep its internal routing tables updated, but the airline does not. The DPSs use of this is evident by the ARINC 620-4 documentation and from the PDF ACARS messages printout supplied by Warren Stutt. In fact, Warren's PDF shows us a perfect example of the Category A network protocol in action with each DLBLK that you see following each ULMSG and ULBLK reference. The aircraft's omnidirectional transmissions are picked up by every RGS within range and it appears as though the routing table sequences a priority based on signal strength of those transmissions; the RGS with the strongest signal received is assigned as the initial station for future uplinks. This routing table is dynamically updated with each downlink from the aircraft, just as the previously uncovered reference material has described, and this is distinct from the static information (i.e. the GL text element which I outlined in my previous post) which is supplied by the airline dispatch in each message sent to the DSP for delivery.

I should clarify that ARINC 620-4 does not indicate what source the airlines rely on for this predicted RGS. That information is likely proprietary per airline or outlined in another standard which defines the communications between the airline and the DSP in more detail; the ATA/IATA Interline Communications Manual (ICM). I haven't looked for this document yet and I don't really think it is necessary to answer the key questions on the table.
But I think it is more than reasonable to assume that the airline's prediction is based on the actual flight plan itself. The GL text elements definitely appear to follow the flight plan in all of the examples I've examined from the FOIA materials.

There is much more to add, yes, but I'd like to get the core points outlined and sourced first.

I made it a tad bit more explanatory, and these are the abbreviations used :

DSP = data link service provider
RGS = remote ground station
DLBLK = downlink block
ULMSG = uplink message
ULBLK = uplink block

Very good investigative work by those two members, Cz and booNyzarC, hats off for both of them.! (See the next posts after the above one linked to, especially #1760 and Post #1764. )

Here we nailed it already purely based on logic, but they did put the real cherry on the cake, by going the whole 4 miles, and buy the documentation from ARINC, not cheap at all.
Hope this will shut Balsamo and friends up for a long time to come.
Real pilots should come and join other, honest forums like ATS and the above UM. (Both, svp).

Post #1760 excerpt :

The short version of this is that Balsamo and crew are completely wrong in their assertions that the ACARS messages in the Team7_Box13_UAL_ACARS.pdf indicate that UA175 and UA93 were in the air after the reported crash times. With the documentation from ARINC Specifications 618-5 and 620-4, combined with the recently linked 5 AWA 898 Printout of ARINC messages.pdf from Warren Stutt the answers are conclusive, incontrovertible, and beyond further debate.

The documents in question prove without any doubt whatsoever that UA175 and UA93 DID NOT receive any uplink messages after their reported crash times.

This series of posts should definitively demonstrate the following points:

The RGS locations referenced in Team7_Box13_UAL_ACARS.pdf were supplied by the airline and do NOT indicate which station was actually used by the DSP (ARINC) to deliver, or attempt to deliver, the uplink message.
The actual RGS used for uplink attempts by the DSP (ARINC) can be the same RGS as predicted by the airline, but it often isn't the same.
Messages from the Team7_Box13_UAL_ACARS.pdf with a secondary time stamp can be confirmed as NOT being delivered to the aircraft by analyzing Warren Stutt's 5 AWA 898 Printout of ARINC messages.pdf, which definitively proves that the secondary time stamp indicates something else entirely.

That nails it, shut. End of discussion a.s.a.p.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by trebor451
It is funny, though. Where did Wetblanky and Bubs49 and ThePostExaminer go? Surely its not a coincidence that when such definitive proof is established that they are as screwed up as Hogan's goat - as right as a soup sandwich and as clear as a football bat - all 3 of them disappear. You'd think perhaps they don't have an answer to all this.

"Divine" wind is not the kind of wind I think of when "Capt" Bob Balsamo's name is mentioned.

When the bird hits the ship... as divine as pea soup.

They'll be playing the dodgeridoo and pretending their cretinous questions need answering; they don't. They must present flyover witnesses... en masse. Or go away.

This is called ---> Burden Of Proof

But... they'll probably settle for hit-and-run style defeat denials, and inspirationless script reading. There might be a sorrowed soul among their ranks capable of mustering a meaningless, vapid non-apology apology.... Who knows.

Snowcrash, buddy, mate, dear old bloke, you're completely lost in your old repeated over and over again vitriol.

Never ever have anybody ever heard you saying anything 'good'.

You're your worst enemy 'boy', (which i called you in another thread) and which is true.

You don't seem to understand how things are working.

In order to 'defeat' which is 'good', you had to come up with something you thought might/were even better!

This was/is your usual response:

Derision, ridicule, scorn, sneer, scoff,, and whatever related to that. You thought that this was 'good' so this
was what you thought and did, and was what your understanding of what 'good' is was all about.
You proved this many times, but this then, were the times you truly became a joke, snowcrach.

You never had any understanding that what you did, and do came and come from the Darkest recessed of
your mind.

Snowcrash, you're no good, and you'll only 'appeal' to the lowest denominator in any society.

Truth is not with you, and it probably never will be ..... in this incarnation off yours!

Cheers







.