I thought everyone who's ever tried any flight sim with buildings since 2001 has tried running into them.. Please don't tell me it's just me
I thought everyone who's ever tried any flight sim with buildings since 2001 has tried running into them.. Please don't tell me it's just me
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: mxyzptlk
I thought everyone who's ever tried any flight sim with buildings since 2001 has tried running into them.. Please don't tell me it's just me
I was doing it before 2001
Oh Oh...We have potential terrorists..j/k.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
Just saw this (sorry if it's a repost):
Twenty-Five US Military Officers Challenge Official Account Of 9/11
Twenty-Five US Military Officers Challenge Official Account Of 9/11
KAZANI
Senior member
- Sep 10, 2006
- 527
- 0
- 0
I don't believe the government because they ARE lying, not the other way around. That is not only based on factual innacuracies inside the official report itself (already given links to the pilotsfor911truth site), but also on reports from members of the commission of deception by government agencies during the investigation (9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon).Anything beyond that is just product of your rampant imagination and flamebait. Answer the points I raised, especially about the 9/11 commission's underfunding, and then talk about being pathetic.
dphantom
Diamond Member
- Jan 14, 2005
- 4,763
- 327
- 126
I don't consider that web site legitimate. Other pilots, including my bro in law who flys commercial just laughed at what it said.
So what if the commission was underfunded. Where does that make it an action by our governemnt or the Israelis to blow up the buildings? Just becasue there are a few inconsistencies as there would be in any major report does not make a conspiracy. Reminds me of the JFK conspiracy nuts out there.
lets take a look at ptech and mitre.
Ptech was with MITRE Corporation in the basement of the FAA for two years prior to 9/11," Singh said. "Their specific job is to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force in the case of an emergency.
Ptech's roster of clients included several governmental agencies, including the United States Armed Forces, NATO, Congress, the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Customs, the FAA, the IRS, the Secret Service, and the White House
http://www.cooperativeresearch...p?entity=james_cerrato
A number of Ptech employees and investors will later be suspected of having ties to groups that have been designated by the US as terrorist organizations:
Yassin al-Qadi, a Saudi multimillionaire. He will invest $5 million of Ptech?s start-up money. The US will declare him an al-Qaeda financier shortly after 9/11 (see October 12, 2001). In 1998, al-Qadi will come under investigation by FBI agent Robert Wright (see October 1998) for potential ties to the 1998 US embassy bombings (see August 7, 1998). Al-Qadi is also a major investor in BMI Inc., an investment firm with connections to a remarkable number of suspected terrorist financiers (see 1986-October 1999). Al-Qadi later will claims that he sold his investment in Ptech in 1999, but there will be evidence he may continue to hold a financial stake after that year, and even after the US will officially declare him a terrorism financier (see 1999-After October 12, 2001).
Soliman Biheiri. He is the head of BMI and a member of Ptech?s board. US prosecutors will later call him the US banker for the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Egyptian militant group. He will later be convicted for lying and immigration fraud
Yaqub Mirza. He is a Ptech investor and on a Ptech advisory board. He directs SAAR, a multi-million dollar network of companies and charities in Herndon, Virginia (see July 29, 1983). In March 2002, US investigators will raid the SAAR network for suspected terrorism ties (see March 20, 2002). In late 2002, the Wall Street Journal will report, ?US officials privately say Mr. Mirza and his associates also have connections to al-Qaeda and to other entities officially listed by the US as sponsors of terrorism
then there was michael goff the israeli american-
He also "performed employee training
and handled all procurement for software, systems and peripherals." AFP
asked Goff, who left the Worcester law firm of Seder & Chandler in 1994, how
he wound up working at Ptech. "Through a temp agency," Goff said, but he
could not remember the name of the agency.
Goff said he did not know who had written the Ptech software code. AFP
contacted the government agencies that reportedly have Ptech software on
their computers, and IBM, to ask if they knew who wrote the Ptech source
code. None had provided any information by press time.
Ptech was with MITRE Corporation in the basement of the FAA for two years prior to 9/11," Singh said. "Their specific job is to look at interoperability issues the FAA had with NORAD and the Air Force in the case of an emergency.
Ptech's roster of clients included several governmental agencies, including the United States Armed Forces, NATO, Congress, the Department of Energy, the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Customs, the FAA, the IRS, the Secret Service, and the White House
http://www.cooperativeresearch...p?entity=james_cerrato
A number of Ptech employees and investors will later be suspected of having ties to groups that have been designated by the US as terrorist organizations:
Yassin al-Qadi, a Saudi multimillionaire. He will invest $5 million of Ptech?s start-up money. The US will declare him an al-Qaeda financier shortly after 9/11 (see October 12, 2001). In 1998, al-Qadi will come under investigation by FBI agent Robert Wright (see October 1998) for potential ties to the 1998 US embassy bombings (see August 7, 1998). Al-Qadi is also a major investor in BMI Inc., an investment firm with connections to a remarkable number of suspected terrorist financiers (see 1986-October 1999). Al-Qadi later will claims that he sold his investment in Ptech in 1999, but there will be evidence he may continue to hold a financial stake after that year, and even after the US will officially declare him a terrorism financier (see 1999-After October 12, 2001).
Soliman Biheiri. He is the head of BMI and a member of Ptech?s board. US prosecutors will later call him the US banker for the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Egyptian militant group. He will later be convicted for lying and immigration fraud
Yaqub Mirza. He is a Ptech investor and on a Ptech advisory board. He directs SAAR, a multi-million dollar network of companies and charities in Herndon, Virginia (see July 29, 1983). In March 2002, US investigators will raid the SAAR network for suspected terrorism ties (see March 20, 2002). In late 2002, the Wall Street Journal will report, ?US officials privately say Mr. Mirza and his associates also have connections to al-Qaeda and to other entities officially listed by the US as sponsors of terrorism
then there was michael goff the israeli american-
He also "performed employee training
and handled all procurement for software, systems and peripherals." AFP
asked Goff, who left the Worcester law firm of Seder & Chandler in 1994, how
he wound up working at Ptech. "Through a temp agency," Goff said, but he
could not remember the name of the agency.
Goff said he did not know who had written the Ptech software code. AFP
contacted the government agencies that reportedly have Ptech software on
their computers, and IBM, to ask if they knew who wrote the Ptech source
code. None had provided any information by press time.
KAZANI
Senior member
- Sep 10, 2006
- 527
- 0
- 0
Oh, and I suppose that because you laughed at it you think you have made a point. What's the matter, doesn't the rule about supporting your arguments with facts apply to you?
So what if the commission was underfunded, so what if it was set up to fail, so what if the government fought against its formation, so what if it allowed Cheney and Bush to testify together in an unrecorded closed hearing, so what if it found that everyone in the executive was negligent but noone was charged or fired! Well, I'll tell WHAT: to a reasonable human being it SHOULD raise suspicion.
Once more for the weekend crowd.
YOU are the head of the President`s Secret Service detail in Florida on 9/11.
YOU receive word that the country is under attack from UNKNOWN forces.
The scope of the attack is also UNKNOWN at that time.
Regardless of what the President or his advisors say, what are YOU, as the head of the detail, sworn to do IMMEDIATELY?
?
YOU are the head of the President`s Secret Service detail in Florida on 9/11.
YOU receive word that the country is under attack from UNKNOWN forces.
The scope of the attack is also UNKNOWN at that time.
Regardless of what the President or his advisors say, what are YOU, as the head of the detail, sworn to do IMMEDIATELY?
?
thanks kazani for that pilots for 911 truth site. i just now really had a chance to look into it. it shows different flight paths (than the official story) for flight 93 and flight 77. pretty interesting. that flight path was too high to hit the lightpoles!!
if anyone is interested in the other perspective of how the towers fell-
http://video.google.com/videos...0gage&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv
this is Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. very informative video. alittle long but well worth the watch.
http://video.google.com/videos...0gage&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv
this is Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. very informative video. alittle long but well worth the watch.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth
website - http://www.ae911truth.org/
if anyone is interested in viewing a movie about how the towers fell from another perspective:
http://video.google.com/videos...0gage&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv
its alittle long but well worth the watch.
website - http://www.ae911truth.org/
if anyone is interested in viewing a movie about how the towers fell from another perspective:
http://video.google.com/videos...0gage&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv
its alittle long but well worth the watch.
remember wayned madsen is an ex NSA employee. everyone needs to read this article that has any doubts about the official 911 story. now back to the israel and 911.
According to the ABC 20/20 report and echoing the East Rutherford police report, the van's driver, Sivan Kurzburg, told DeCarlo, "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem."[17] The Israelis also reportedly told police they were tourists.[18] When the FBI developed the photos taken by the Israelis of the World Trade Center carnage, one photo depicted Kurzburg flicking a cigarette lighter in a celebratory manner with the burning buildings in the background
According to several Weehawken neighbors of the Urban Moving Systems warehouse, the FBI, upon searching the the warehouse, discovered fertilizer, other chemicals for making explosives, pipes, caps, and traces of anthrax. After anthrax was discovered, investigators wearing hazardous material suits went through the warehouse. Residents around Urban Moving Systems who had connections to the local police also reported that helicopters with infrared radar swooped in over the warehouse on several occasions.[16]
-those mailboxes where the anthrax was mailed wasnt to far off from that weehawken warehouse!!!-
from the israeli dea report- i wonder how many of these guys that were specialist in demotion were out there.
http://www.antiwar.com/rep2/Me...lectCommitteesbold.pdf
97. SEGALOVITZ reluctantly stated that he was an officer of the Israeli military special forces 605 battalion in Golan Heights. SEGALOVITZ has the rank of Lieutenant and his military ID number is 5087989. SEGALOVITZ stated that he commanded approximately 80 men. SEGALOVITZ stated that he had been in infantry, but as a platoon leader he and his men specialized in demolition. SEGALOVITZ then began to explain the various types of explosives that he was familiar with and stated that his main purpose was to clear mine fields for Israeli tanks and soldiers. SEGALOVITZ acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars and anything else that he needed too.
SAGIV stated he was in the Israeli military in 1995-1996, and was the personal bodyguard of the highest ranking General in the Israeli Army. He also stated he was a demolition expert. stated he has a cousin (NFI) in Hollywood, FL, and a cousin (NFI) in Coral Springs, FL.
105. NAVAR, Ofir, NADDIS - Negative. Israeli, DOB 09/02/1979, POB: Israel, former Israeli Military Demolition/Explosive ordnance specialist (Identified in paragraph 46)
According to the ABC 20/20 report and echoing the East Rutherford police report, the van's driver, Sivan Kurzburg, told DeCarlo, "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem."[17] The Israelis also reportedly told police they were tourists.[18] When the FBI developed the photos taken by the Israelis of the World Trade Center carnage, one photo depicted Kurzburg flicking a cigarette lighter in a celebratory manner with the burning buildings in the background
According to several Weehawken neighbors of the Urban Moving Systems warehouse, the FBI, upon searching the the warehouse, discovered fertilizer, other chemicals for making explosives, pipes, caps, and traces of anthrax. After anthrax was discovered, investigators wearing hazardous material suits went through the warehouse. Residents around Urban Moving Systems who had connections to the local police also reported that helicopters with infrared radar swooped in over the warehouse on several occasions.[16]
-those mailboxes where the anthrax was mailed wasnt to far off from that weehawken warehouse!!!-
from the israeli dea report- i wonder how many of these guys that were specialist in demotion were out there.
http://www.antiwar.com/rep2/Me...lectCommitteesbold.pdf
97. SEGALOVITZ reluctantly stated that he was an officer of the Israeli military special forces 605 battalion in Golan Heights. SEGALOVITZ has the rank of Lieutenant and his military ID number is 5087989. SEGALOVITZ stated that he commanded approximately 80 men. SEGALOVITZ stated that he had been in infantry, but as a platoon leader he and his men specialized in demolition. SEGALOVITZ then began to explain the various types of explosives that he was familiar with and stated that his main purpose was to clear mine fields for Israeli tanks and soldiers. SEGALOVITZ acknowledged he could blow up buildings, bridges, cars and anything else that he needed too.
SAGIV stated he was in the Israeli military in 1995-1996, and was the personal bodyguard of the highest ranking General in the Israeli Army. He also stated he was a demolition expert. stated he has a cousin (NFI) in Hollywood, FL, and a cousin (NFI) in Coral Springs, FL.
105. NAVAR, Ofir, NADDIS - Negative. Israeli, DOB 09/02/1979, POB: Israel, former Israeli Military Demolition/Explosive ordnance specialist (Identified in paragraph 46)
KAZANI
Senior member
- Sep 10, 2006
- 527
- 0
- 0
1. According to the NTSB animation, which is based on the flight data recorder, the final maneuver was performed with great precision and there was no rocking like the article alleges. Nor was there any left wing tilt:
American 77 Final Maneuver
By the way, the animation shows the plane was too high to have hit any light poles.
2. Nice try convincing people that flying large airliners is such a trivial matter, anyone could do it. The way the author puts it, a pilot only needs to learn how to land because once you're on the air Magic Flight Control System takes care of everything while it leaves you free to enjoy your hot cup of coffee. But some experienced pilots and aeronautical engineers just don't buy that:
Expert Pilot Doesn't Believe Official Version Of 9/11
The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training - By Nila Sagadevan
Well, maybe not EVERYTHING since the numerous surveillance cameras at the Pentagon missed it. But then again, it was only a wee little plane, right?
The answer to this should be within the scopes of a new investigation.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
The article alledges rocking because numerous eyewitnesses stated the plane's wings were rocking.
As far as the FDR, JREF has a very detailed discussion on that subject.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=109066
In fact, it's funny reading through that thread and watching them own Pilots for 9/11 Truth. I had no idea JohnDoeX, a long time 9/11 nutter, was running that website.
Nice try? Those words come from a commercial airline pilot. The author is quoting that pilot. Try reading a little closer next time.
How many of those security cameras were pointed in the proper direction to capture the impact in the first place? What was the frame rate of the cameras that were pointed in the proper position? What was the resolution? How fast was the plane traveling prior to impact? Would the cameras be able to significantly capture a high-speed object at their frame-rate and resolution.
btw, at least one security camera did capture some of it. Surely you've seen it? You probably also noticed that the camera had a slow frame-rate (@ 1 fps) and was low resolution (maybe 640 x 480, and that's giving it the benefit of the doubt).
[/quote]
The old investigation already answered that question with near certainty. You have no compelling evidence to show otherwise. None. If you can manage to come up with some actual compelling evidence, which the truthers have epically failed to do time after time after time, then another investigation would be warranted. As it stands now you have nothing.
- Aug 23, 2003
- 25,375
- 142
- 116
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
lol. Alex Jones.
But I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. Let's see him produce some of these documents he claims to have. From the interview though he appears to be blowing the same smoke out of his ass that every other 9/11 conspiracy theorist does. Always full of hollow accusations but nothing solid, ever.
dphantom
Diamond Member
- Jan 14, 2005
- 4,763
- 327
- 126
Need another fruit basket??
Do some checking before posting trash.
Who is Stanley Hilton
Hilton refuted
Sheila Burke was Bob Doles chief of staff. Hilton was a minor functionary.
tlc- what do u think of the black box data that pilots for 911 truth analyzed.
This altitude has been determined to reflect Pressure altitude as set by 29.92 inHg on the Altimeter. The actual local pressure for DCA at impact time was 30.22 inHg. The error for this discrepancy is 300 feet. Meaning, the actual aircraft altitude was 300 feet higher than indicated at that moment in time. Which means aircraft altitude was 480 feet above sea level (MSL, 75 foot margin for error according to Federal Aviation Regulations). You can clearly see the highway in the below screenshot directly under the aircraft. The elevation for that highway is ~40 feet above sea level according to the US Geological Survey. The light poles would have had to been 440 feet tall (+/- 75 feet) for this aircraft to bring them down. Which you can clearly see in the below picture, the aircraft is too high, even for the official released video of the 5 frames where you see something cross the Pentagon Lawn at level attitude. The 5 frames of video captured by the parking gate cam is in direct conflict with the Aircraft Flight Data Recorder information released by the NTSB. More information will be forthcoming as we come to our conclusions on each issue. We have contacted the NTSB regarding the conflict between the official story and the FDR. They refuse to comment.
also, that site u posted dosent talk about "ground effect". they say it is "aerodynamically impossible" more military guys questioning 911.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKhBzAh_eeA
This altitude has been determined to reflect Pressure altitude as set by 29.92 inHg on the Altimeter. The actual local pressure for DCA at impact time was 30.22 inHg. The error for this discrepancy is 300 feet. Meaning, the actual aircraft altitude was 300 feet higher than indicated at that moment in time. Which means aircraft altitude was 480 feet above sea level (MSL, 75 foot margin for error according to Federal Aviation Regulations). You can clearly see the highway in the below screenshot directly under the aircraft. The elevation for that highway is ~40 feet above sea level according to the US Geological Survey. The light poles would have had to been 440 feet tall (+/- 75 feet) for this aircraft to bring them down. Which you can clearly see in the below picture, the aircraft is too high, even for the official released video of the 5 frames where you see something cross the Pentagon Lawn at level attitude. The 5 frames of video captured by the parking gate cam is in direct conflict with the Aircraft Flight Data Recorder information released by the NTSB. More information will be forthcoming as we come to our conclusions on each issue. We have contacted the NTSB regarding the conflict between the official story and the FDR. They refuse to comment.
also, that site u posted dosent talk about "ground effect". they say it is "aerodynamically impossible" more military guys questioning 911.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKhBzAh_eeA
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
The thread I linked previously at JREF completely destroyed PFT's claims about the black box data. The "pilots" couldn't even get elementary physics and math right, and they subsequently pulled their claims when the JREFers exposed the errors, so it brings into question how many of the PFTs are really pilots or just troothers masquerading as pilots, just like many Scholars for 9/11 Truth weren't actually scholars, and most Veterans for 9/11 Truth aren't veterans. One would think pilots would be sharp enough to get the math that's directly relevant to their knowledge correct.
PFT is yet another construct of the truthers used as a fig leaf to garner an air of authority. Ultimately they are truthers first and foremost digging for any morsel, no matter how ridiculous and far-fetched, that confirms their beliefs. That why "truthers" is a misnomer. They aren't looking for truth. They're searching for anything that they think might back up their version of events.
As far a ground effects...a plane flying at close to 500mph is not going to be subject to ground effects. Ground effects are present @ or near landing speeds. iirc, I've already addressed that issue previously.
this is what that guy says on that website:
It has recently been suggested that the terminal trajectory of American Flight 77 -- the aircraft that impacted the Pentagon on September 11th -- as reconstructed by (a) nearby obstacles, and (b) fragmentary data from the Flight Data Recorder, is implausible given the performance limits of the aircraft. Some have further suggested that this leads one to conclude that a coverup of one form or another is underway.
In this whitepaper, we will examine the measurements and the mathematics in an effort to verify or refute these claims.
he examined the measurements and the mathematics........ok. he didnt examine the blackbox data did he???
he can examine all he wants too. he's tracking something alright. something hit those poles. something hit the pentagon. something killed those people. was it a 757????????? i just dont think it was.
anyway, he still doesnt go into ground effect. i searched the whole thread. again, this could just be a propaganda site!! hahaha
Our source, having had direct and extensive personal flying experience at low altitudes, also completely dismissed the feasibility that a Boeing 757 could be flown for any significant distance at just 20 feet above ground. He also cited other pilots of large commercial aircraft who concurred.
A phenomenon called 'ground effect' describes the energized cushion of air between the wings and the ground which increases in energy the faster the plane flies. Flight 77 is reported to have whisked up the highway and into the Pentagon at breakneck acceleration, even increasing in speed before it hit, a maneuver described as impossible by the pilot at 20 feet above the ground, due to the reaction of the energized ground effect layer which would simply not have allowed it, even if the pilot was furiously pulling back the throttle which was not the case.
http://www.propagandamatrix.co...06/230506doesntfly.htm
theres other sites that talk about ground effect as well.
It has recently been suggested that the terminal trajectory of American Flight 77 -- the aircraft that impacted the Pentagon on September 11th -- as reconstructed by (a) nearby obstacles, and (b) fragmentary data from the Flight Data Recorder, is implausible given the performance limits of the aircraft. Some have further suggested that this leads one to conclude that a coverup of one form or another is underway.
In this whitepaper, we will examine the measurements and the mathematics in an effort to verify or refute these claims.
he examined the measurements and the mathematics........ok. he didnt examine the blackbox data did he???
he can examine all he wants too. he's tracking something alright. something hit those poles. something hit the pentagon. something killed those people. was it a 757????????? i just dont think it was.
anyway, he still doesnt go into ground effect. i searched the whole thread. again, this could just be a propaganda site!! hahaha
Our source, having had direct and extensive personal flying experience at low altitudes, also completely dismissed the feasibility that a Boeing 757 could be flown for any significant distance at just 20 feet above ground. He also cited other pilots of large commercial aircraft who concurred.
A phenomenon called 'ground effect' describes the energized cushion of air between the wings and the ground which increases in energy the faster the plane flies. Flight 77 is reported to have whisked up the highway and into the Pentagon at breakneck acceleration, even increasing in speed before it hit, a maneuver described as impossible by the pilot at 20 feet above the ground, due to the reaction of the energized ground effect layer which would simply not have allowed it, even if the pilot was furiously pulling back the throttle which was not the case.
http://www.propagandamatrix.co...06/230506doesntfly.htm
theres other sites that talk about ground effect as well.
TastesLikeChicken
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2004
- 16,852
- 59
- 86
Well finally you admit to what you believe concerning 9/11, at least a small portion. Have you ever bothered to look at the copious amount of evidence that shows a 757, specifically AA77, hit the Pentagon? The fuselage parts? The engine parts? The DNA findings? And if you don't believe a 757 hit the Pentagon, what do you think did?
As far as ground effect, I didn't say JREF went into ground effect. I stated that I had addressed the issue previously in here.
Anyway, does this source have experience flying a 757 at 30 ft off the ground at 400 or 500mph? I doubt it. No doubt you're also aware that ground effect really isn't an issue at such high speeds, or that the computers of a 757 will compensate quite a bit for ground effects, or that larger aircraft @ 7+ tons aren't really subject to the deleterious issues presented by ground effects, or that ground effects are actually beneficial and easily controllable which is why we have vehicles like hovercrafts? Of course, the "truthers" will never tell you any of those things.
btw, the PFT site is misleading you on the altimeter issue. You might want to do some more research on that.
KAZANI
Senior member
- Sep 10, 2006
- 527
- 0
- 0
JREF dismisses FDR as a meaningfull source of information altogether. Man, that's unfair! Hanjour had all the gadgetry in the world to help him fly the way no sane pilot would dare to outside the virtual world, but technology is never with the truth movement's side, eh?
Unless the author can provide a full name for his Brian Doe source, that part counts as his own opinion.
Using old-school 1fps surveillance cameras at the headquarters of one of the world's mightiests militaries? What's the matter, couldn't they fit a contract for decent CCTV in that trillion dollar budget black hole of theirs?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter