9/11 Pentagon Flight Recorder Fraud Revealed

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Nothing 'nonsense' about Stutt's work, he simply decompressed the file and used the published fdr frame to recover the data. Sorry if you don't like what the fdr has to say, but much of it has been confirmed from other sources (such as radar). The OP itself is based on his readout of that file. Seems rather disingenuous on the one hand to cite it as proof of a conspiracy ("fraud revealed") and on the other claim that the guy who recovered the data is part of the conspiracy. Logic seems to fail on this one.

Originally posted by zarp3333

Originally posted by g146541
Too many years of disinformation.
We will never know what the full truth is, yep whoever did it got away.

I do not accept your assertion. There is no statute of limitations for murder. Plenty of criminals have been brought to justice after 11 short years.

If you are not interested in justice, why do you bother posting here? My intuition tells me that people are more inclined to believe a lie the more times it is repeated. My intuition tells me you are not being completely forthcoming regarding your motives and intentions.

The criminals responsible for this tragedy shall be brought to justice. I KNOW that to be true. Co-conspirators, accomplices and unwitting fools shall also pay for their crimes because there is no honor amongst filth. As the evidence becomes overwhelming, they shall start turning one each other looking to save their pathetic asses.

How many conspirators have been found in the endless well of conspiracies?
Only the patsies.
Let's just say hitler did escape and was still alive and was caught today.
Would he live through the trial and be able to be punished for his crimes?
What if the JFK thing was a conspiracy and they caught the 2 shooters on the grassy knoll, would they spend enough time in prison for it to be considered punishment for their crimes, or would they die of old age?
I think your'e wrong, the bad guy always seems to get away.

Of course the flight recorder of Flight 77 is fraudulent...unless missiles in 2001 had airplane flight recorders on board.

The government confiscated cam footage from across the street of the strike and then later released 2 vague frames of an obscure mass hitting the Pentagon from another camera.

If it was actually Flight 77 then they wouldn't have to cover it up. And if it were an actual airplane then it would have left damage that an airplane of its dimensions would. Which it didn't.

Look at 23 seconds. Does that look like a passenger plane...or a missile? Look at its incoming angle and shape. And a side question: why does the US DoD, with by far the largest "defense" budget on the planet, have such piss poor security cameras (lol@how ridiculous that sounds)? They don't. They purposely lowered the FPS.

Come on now, put it all together. I believe in you.

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
My God, he says according to the FDR data, that the RUDDER PEDALS WERE NOT USED IN THE TURN!

On all the jets i've ever flown the rudder pedals are used during takeoff and landings at slow speed to compensate for crosswind/engine out scenario.

All other phases of flight in clean configuration an high speed it's feet on the floor.
As waypastvne said the yaw damper will keep turns coordinated without rudder input from the pilots.

American Airlines Flight 587 is also a good example of why the rudder pedals shouldn't be used during high speed.

en.wikipedia.org...

On the other hand i guess Capt. Rob and his crew are used to much smaller hardware where no yaw damper is fitted, or turned off during takeoff and landings.

As for the flight deck door monitoring on the FDR, since it's not mandatory it is a customer option on Boeing airplanes.

edit on 28-7-2012 by Ivar_Karlsen because: Fog

Yeah.. you're quite right Ivar. I was wondering if anyone else would pick that up. No heavy jet I've ever flown required any rudder input of any note at anything over 500ft above the ground... well, nothing with swept wings at any rate.

People should be a bit more careful about they 'bite' at and how they choose to do so. Just one seemingly insignificant detail, when handled or responded to incorrectly, can blow what would at any other time be a very valid and credible argument out of the water... especially when there's so many people on this site alone, just sitting and waiting for one screw up and than they pounce; ensuing nobody else listens to what you have to say... dangerous.

For the record...I've still yet to meet another pilot with time on heavy jets who believes the government version of what went into the Pentagon. Period. From 3,500hr guys all the way up to your +20Khrs pilots who when they talk about flying airliners, you need to STFU, pull your head in, except you know # and your opinion is based on absolutely nothing of any note or value. If you don't like what they're saying... tough #. Who the hell do all you people think you are anyway??!!

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
it appears that Dennis has now gone the way of No Plane Theory, and is in some kind of association with Fetzer.

And as such, any credibility he has is reduced to zero. Therefore, nothing he says can be taken seriously.

P4T also cannot be taken seriously when they associate with jokers like Cimino and Lear.

edit on 28-7-2012 by _BoneZ_ because: (no reason given)

Why because you say so??, utterly hilarious, if you have ANY wan't to know what the truth is, don't dismiss ANYTHING as being "Wrong", especially when you do not know what RIGHT is.

The most compelling piece of evidence was removed from youtube, but can very easily be re-created by someone with a little video editing experience.
Get a youtube called All 48 strikes, and add to it a "Bump" mask, and look to see if the towers show ANY indication of a "Plane" hitting it.
The Greyscale bump mask shows in very fine detail the waves of ripples as the energy of the event is moved around the face of the WTC.
What you see is, The so called "Largest event" the plane hitting the tower, shows absolutely no waves of energy moving around the building.
If the greyscale is sensitive enough to enable the human eye to see the events expressed as waves of energy propagating around the building, why doesn't it show ANY indication of anything hitting the front side of the building, from something as MASSIVE as an aircraft strike.

What you do see though, is he propagation of shockwaves from the explosion from INSIDE the building.
That explosion and the "PLANE" "Hitting" the building are two seperate events, and the explosion event that has taken place inside the building sending a shockwave that appears on the top back right corner of the tower and then propagate DOWN the front from the top towards where the plane entered.
The "Entry" of the plane shows NO evidence of any kind of interaction of the plane and the structure of the building.
The explosion taking place is nothing to do with a "Plane".
After pointing this out at 9/11 UK under the writing name tomsk, and after some debate with chet over this he agreed that i was correct.
The video was pulled from youtube, the thread redacted by almost 30 pages and locked, leaving only the official stories version intact.

If you continually dismiss things out of hand, you will never ever find the truth, because, the truth is not a simple as the government would have you believe, the truth is elusive, and yet, with careful scrutiny using your ability to discern fact from fiction, it is still possible to discover the truth.

No planes hit the twin towers, brilliant, who would ever believe that the event seen by billions of people, many times over, never actually happened as seen.
Just the sort of programming and defence structure the illusionists would create to defend by cognitive dissonance, the FACTS.

There you go, prove me wrong, get the video, add the greyscale bump mask and call me a liar.

Originally posted by GovernmentLoyalist
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

Seems rather disingenuous on the one hand to cite it as proof of a conspiracy ("fraud revealed")

Actually the evidence of the flight carrier being 00000 and the flight number being 00000 shows amply enough that there was a conspiracy of people "Breathing Together" to get a bench testing FDR into the public domain containing evidence that attempts to portray the flight of the aircraft to the pentagon.

In that case, does that mean the truthers will finally stop accusing all the eyewitnesses in the vicinity who specifically stated it was a plane they saw hit the Pentagon as being dinsinformation agents? I've seen the "no plane" theorists pull that accusation out time after time and I'm sure you have as well.

They saw a plane, not that one hit the pentagon.

No plane theory - missile theory - explosives theory - different plane theory...

I'm really glad all of these "our government is evil" experts are on the ball with their investigations! And just to be on the safe side, they have covered all possible alternate theories it could have been.. Hmm.. which to choose, which to choose.. so many choices!

Simple question deserves a simple answer. Where's my friends husband who was on that plane?

I have a request.

I would like to know who has actually taken the time to watch BOTH videos in the OP, from start to finish. And tried to really understand. Because I'd like to interact with you. Please, will the lurkers and truth seekers that have done this come forward and say, and perhaps comment on those things which either surprised you, or you find very interesting? There has been a lot of periphery posts in this thread, but most of it severely lacks in directly addressing the issues that Dennis brings up. Thanks!

Originally posted by The X
No planes hit the twin towers, brilliant, who would ever believe that the event seen by billions of people, many times over, never actually happened as seen.

Uh, the no-plane disinformation is a proven HOAX. You'll find the no-plane HOAX threads in the HOAX forum.

Originally posted by Morg234

In that case, does that mean the truthers will finally stop accusing all the eyewitnesses in the vicinity who specifically stated it was a plane they saw hit the Pentagon as being dinsinformation agents? I've seen the "no plane" theorists pull that accusation out time after time and I'm sure you have as well.

They saw a plane, not that one hit the pentagon.

There are actually rather a lot of witnesses who saw a plane hit the Pentagon :-

911research.wtc7.net...

Originally posted by wrkn4livn
Simple question deserves a simple answer. Where's my friends husband who was on that plane?

edit on 29-7-2012 by wrkn4livn because: (no reason given)

Hummm... No answer. Wait I know! He was killed and ground into dust upon impact. Poor guy. At least he didn't feel a thing.

ALERT: For those that have attempted to research Yaw Dampers, be extremely careful. It appears the Q Group is ready to infect you with a virus. That's how low they will go.

THE VERY FIRST LINK ON GOOGLE in search results, starting with domain www.boeing-7##.### ( DO NOT ATTEMPT TO OPEN THIS DOMAIN!!!), was busted by my trusty A/V program the second the code tried to load and infect me.

EDIT: to be clearer, I was lead to search the term "Yaw damper function" from the google auto search aggregator. Which served up the malicious link first.

It's a trap. That would have brought down my system. Every expletive there is, is on the tip of my tongue right now and I am fricken PISSED

Note that the user did not direct us to a link, but instead to search for the term.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Staff alerted. Total BS.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


MY GOD more subtifuge. Ok, we get it, it was an inside job and they got away with it....or, it was crazy terrorists out to kill emericans, and they got away with it. It's going on 11 years now, get over it

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Oh well; if you are going to try and investigate something dangerous and controversial like "yaw dampers" what do you expect ?

What an exciting life you lead.

My first link was actually Wikipedia - the second one had the virus. Not that it was terribly dangerous - I don't know why you think it would have "shut you down." Very few viruses can utterly make your computer unusable.

Anyway, there are so many theories about the Pentagon alone - all by supposedly knowledgeable people - and they are all different. You honestly expect someone to believe one story over another?

As far as the "no plane" theory, it's ridiculous. Multiple people SAW the plane. That sort of defeats the "no plane" theory in of itself. The half-arsed attempt to discredit the witnesses failed miserably. They interviewed less than half of the witnesses, and attacked people's character if they did get interviewed. "So and so is a known liar in the past.." Are you kidding me? And you are supposed to believe or support these conspiracy people who will go to any lengths to "prove" they are right?

Originally posted by Alfie1---->Oh well; if you are going to try and investigate something dangerous and controversial like "yaw dampers" what do you expect ?

I would suggest using "dutch rolls" as a search phrase, it's in the same ballpark but not nearly as dangrous.

Originally posted by GrinchNoMore
It really is funny, that Official Story Eaters...have absolutely NO evidence that it was NOT an inside job, yet scream for bloody murder that they KNOW ...without ANY evidence that it was performed by some Arab dudes for reasons that only a paranoid schizo could fabricate in their tortured minds.

All logic and reasoning would show them that they are totally programmed to believe what they do, and they absolutely do NOT want to go too that area of the soul, and realize through this programming, that they DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE !!

I tend to believe that reasoning exists. Rumsfeld's remarks about flight 93 being shot down, a slip of the tongue? most certainly, and all depending on how you wish to interpret what is a slip of the tongue. But when the same phrase in essence is repeated in court, by prosecutor Timothy Stone, "If they hadn't shot down the fourth plane it would've hit the dome," we are expected to again to accept a different emphasis on what Stone said. This happened in the pre trial of OBL's 'driver' Salim Hamdan in 2008. Stone made the statement, but he was not the one to qualify it, it was left to the tribunal's chief prosecutor, Col. Lawrence Morris, who later explained that Stone was 'quoting' Hamdan in evidence that will be presented at trial. That alone shows you how cheeky the prosecutor can be just to get a man into court. At that point no one alluded as to what 'the dome' was, yet the whole scenario was to prove that Hamdan knew what the planes target was, whatever it was supposed to be, and by default then, he knew that the plane was shot down,


uk.reuters.com...

Sorry coming late for a touch and go... haven't read the thread just the OP.

An aileron turn doesn't require coordinated rudder input unless you want to stay level in the turn.

(Airplanes turn because of banking created by the ailerons, not because of a rudder input.

If the high jackers wanted to turn and decrease elevation at the same time they would turn the yoke to the left and "push it in" slightly in order to begin a turn whilst decreasing altitude at the same time. Rudders aren't required. Besides part of the deception is a change in direction and altitude to confuse controllers. Isn't that when they turned off transponder signals? (I don't know)

And the door was cut with box cutters tight? So they burst through the door instead of opening it?

I also don't know that either but it makes sense to those two issues.