Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
lliqerty

911 Pentagon Video Footage

3,304 posts in this topic

60 Minutes did a piece on such therapy, and there was a lady who had been a subway train driver for Boston for some number of years. One day a person committed suicide by jumping in front of her train, where she happened to be sitting driving the train. A very graphic traumatization. Obviously, she retained a shrink after the accident, but eventually was treated with the beta blockers very successfully. Perhaps another woman who had been raped quite young?

Anyway you can find it on Google.

How awful....It could be a number of things anymore. Did you ever hear about the story where the woman found out her dad was about to take her nieces on a vacation, and she knew he raped her and her sister (the girls mom) yet she was still going to let them go....the woman went to her dads, tied him up, and cut his penis off- she called 911 on herself because she simply didnt want two more victims of her father and she iliminated the problem. She drove to a location and threw it, it was never found and she wasnt going to give it to the doctors, but was supposed to go like the Bobbit story didnt. He died because he bled to death.---long story short- thousands stood by her, she was sentenced probation and I think a few months in jail for unintentional manslaughter or w.e. its called. I was rooting for this poor woman, she will be hurting forever but at least he wont have any more victims. Her sister come to her aide in court and told the truth about her dad raping her also....who knows what she was thinking with allowing him to take her kids anywhere!

OH yeah I plan on doing some more reading on beta blockers thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How awful....It could be a number of things anymore. Did you ever hear about the story where the woman found out her dad was about to take her nieces on a vacation, and she knew he raped her and her sister (the girls mom) yet she was still going to let them go....the woman went to her dads, tied him up, and cut his penis off- she called 911 on herself because she simply didnt want two more victims of her father and she iliminated the problem. She drove to a location and threw it, it was never found and she wasnt going to give it to the doctors, but was supposed to go like the Bobbit story didnt. He died because he bled to death.---long story short- thousands stood by her, she was sentenced probation and I think a few months in jail for unintentional manslaughter or w.e. its called. I was rooting for this poor woman, she will be hurting forever but at least he wont have any more victims. Her sister come to her aide in court and told the truth about her dad raping her also....who knows what she was thinking with allowing him to take her kids anywhere!

OH yeah I plan on doing some more reading on beta blockers thank you.

Sounds like we're veering off topic again around here.

Beta Blockers?

Look, they're also used to lower elevated intraoccular pressures and in treating Gloucoma.

What any of this has to do with 9-11 I don't know, but since you seem to have gotten involved in a sub-discussuion, I thought I'd let you know.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like we're veering off topic again around here.

Beta Blockers?

Look, they're also used to lower elevated intraoccular pressures and in treating Gloucoma.

What any of this has to do with 9-11 I don't know, but since you seem to have gotten involved in a sub-discussuion, I thought I'd let you know.

wow. okay, me sorry master. thank you though lol.

Edited by OnlineCriticChick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because Babe Ruth hates it when he strikes-out. :passifier:

Swing and a miss!

That curve ball we throw is un-hitable.

K...

Another mark for the score book!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt think one tiny sentence would end the would, thank you though.

Normally it wouldn't.... but three posts in a row that have virtually nothing to do with the topic of this thread...? If you're that interested in beta blockers, I'm sure there's other places more suited to discussing them than a thread discussing (or attempting to) a particular aspect of 9/11. PM's are also useful for discussing off-topic topics.

That said, I will give you credit for at least mentioning "plane" and "pentagon" in the same sentence in one of those posts...

Cz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow. okay, me sorry master. thank you though lol.

Welcome.

Just tring to help.

:tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Im seeing why these forums have the same 10 trolls and a few nice people that don't have OCD that have welcomed me with open arms.....just thought Id try to talk to a few people that had the same interests, Ill continue with the other blogs Im a member of, I dont like being a part of something so damn rude. Its called Freedom of Speech, you didnt HAVE to read my comments. Now think of something clever to write back, I could give 2 ****s, I won't be reading it.

You realize freedom of speech doesn't apply to privately owned forums right?

All he did was rightly mention that it was off topic. He didn't stop you from talking about it in a different part of the forum. Lighten up.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was not low enough to scrape the cowlings in the grass, and he was not high enough to have the tail clear the building. I don't know the exact number, but any competent mathematician could calculate the number pretty quickly.

American 77 was low enough that it scraped the top of the generator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever aircraft was captured in that parking lot camera, it was NOT a 757. :no:

On the contrary, I recognized the vertical stabilizer as that of a B-757. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been watching airplanes for most of my life, happily. And helicopters, and anything else that goes through the air.

I've seen Boeings low level, and other big airplanes. The tail was mostly what was seen, because of its vertical span, and whatever tail that was, it wasn't a 757 tail.

I have to say it once again, that is the tail of a B-757. BTW, I had a chance to talk with a few B-757 pilots at our convention in Las Vegas, and I might add the 9/11 CT folks do not have many friends in that group.

Edited by skyeagle409
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell it like it is skyeagle !! :sk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, Bade, want to join the fun? I see you're reading here and your observations are always welcome.

Kludge,

Old buddy, it is always a pleasure to read your posts! I used to post in these threads, but admittedly my patience wore out. But you along with a lot of other posters here (too many to mention), offer a lot of good and well thought out contributions that I'd have little to no hope of adding significantly to. So I am content to just lurk and siphon in information I did not know already :)

Oh, and by the way, I was not aware you were an EE. May I ask your specialty? I dabble in RF/optical stuff.

By the way, I wound up with the goat.

Ouch :P

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited by badeskov
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Badeskov... good to see you here.. :tu:

Don't sell yourself short.... Anything you'd have to add would definitely be welcomed and appreciated. Your posts have always been educational and entertaining... :)

Cz

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Badeskov... good to see you here.. :tu:

Don't sell yourself short.... Anything you'd have to add would definitely be welcomed and appreciated. Your posts have always been educational and entertaining... :)

Cz

Cz,

I really appreciate your kind words, they mean a lot to me. I truly enjoy the contributions that you and others make here and I learn a lot from them. Unfortunately work has gotten the good of me and I have to limit myself a bit, so I post a bit in the UFO area, albeit not as much as I would like. Hopefully one day I can get some more time and engage myself a bit more :)

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cz,

I really appreciate your kind words, they mean a lot to me. I truly enjoy the contributions that you and others make here and I learn a lot from them. Unfortunately work has gotten the good of me and I have to limit myself a bit, so I post a bit in the UFO area, albeit not as much as I would like. Hopefully one day I can get some more time and engage myself a bit more :)

Cheers,

Badeskov

As much as I echo Cz's sentiments and would love to see your contributions in this area of the forums, I commend your restraint and even envy it. :tu:

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As much as I echo Cz's sentiments and would love to see your contributions in this area of the forums, I commend your restraint and even envy it. :tu:

Also to you, BooNy, thank you for your kind words. I truly wish I had some more time to engage these days as I miss the good discussions. But lurking is not bad at all, from you, Cz, MID, Frenat, Obviousman, Posty, Swannie, etc. I learn a lot!

But hopefully I will be back :)

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Im seeing why these forums have the same 10 trolls and a few nice people that don't have OCD that have welcomed me with open arms.....just thought Id try to talk to a few people that had the same interests, Ill continue with the other blogs Im a member of, I dont like being a part of something so damn rude. Its called Freedom of Speech, you didnt HAVE to read my comments. Now think of something clever to write back, I could give 2 ****s, I won't be reading it.

But the topic of this thread is about 9/11 and the Pentagon, that's all that people have been trying to gently remind you.. I'm not sure if there's really any need to react quite so touchily. Perhaps Off-Topic Discussion might be a better place to discuss these matters? People have merely been trying to suggest this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting post. I don't recall the 11G value. I thought it was more around 4G, but the rest of your post is the most interesting.

That was Rob Balsamo's claim as to why the whole thing was impossible. Farmer's 3.5G figure is more in keeping with accepted values and provides a reasonable average of them.

The Hani Bob & Weave!!! :tsu: I love it, because it makes my point about the difficulty of the low level portion of the maneuver.

No, it doesn't. It simply means that he was an unsteady pilot which was already known from the FDR data. All I did was give it a name.

Basically, embracing the official story, one must acknowledge that Hani transitioned from his Bob & Weave flying, right up there near the airspeed redline, having JUST transitioned from a Cessna to a Boeing, and then turns in a flawless approach within 5 feet of the ground right to the building. If that is not an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable, I don't know what is.

First off, why do CTs always ignore the simulator time? Further, why do CTs always ignore the fact that yoke, rudder pedal and throttle movements result in the same reactions no matter what one is flying? These two items are totally beyond my comprehension as it is, very likely, beyond that of the other pilots here. MID? Skyeagle (Welcome back)? Comment?

Second, at no point was that approach, including the altitude dumping turn, near Vne. The turn was at around 300 kts while the final impact speed was 460 kts. Both are well below Vne. The idea that any part of the flight was at (or above) Vne was put to bed at least once previously yet you bring it up again even though you know - or should know - it has been shown to be false. Would you care to explain your apparent absentmindedness?

And finally, what flawless approach? It has been pointed out numerous times that it was far from flawless. Hani hit the building where he hit the building. It's not like it had a bull's eye painted on it and he nailed it first crack. His goal was simply to fly into the Pentagon and didn't care where. The reason he hit the side he did was that it was the closest to his original flight path. There's no magic there but it is something many CTists fail to take into consideration. That doesn't require any sort of precision flying and the fact that he struck it "one hung low" is a fair indication he still was flying the Hani Bob and Weave. While there's no indication he did, he could have skipped the airplane off the ground prior to contact and still achieved the same goal. Likewise, the same end result would have been achieved if he had passed North of the Citgo. The downed light poles et al were the result of the actual flight path. Had he flown another, like North of the Citgo, then other indicators would have been present. Again, no magic is required nor is any phenomenal amount of skill.

And like MID, you suggest that what gave Hani these magnificent, if inconsistent, flying skills was his anticipation of 72 virgins. LOL.

You underestimate the power of religious fanaticism especially with a jihadist. The 72 virgins is part of it but it is only part. OTOH it's the part that is the most fun to mention. Jihadists play by a different set of rules from most people. They see themselves as judge, jury & executioner and their death leading to martyrdom. The Muslims I know - and I know quite a few - all distance themselves from these few since they in no way reflect true Islamic belief.

Not asking you to be a Google Monkey here, but if you're interested in the role of beta blockers in therapy for psychic trauma, it's very well documented. 60 Minutes even covered it a few years back. I was put on the drug in about 2004.

After I was told what it was for, I did do the Google Thing and I think I know why it hasn't been prescribed for me. There's a potential of drug interaction which wouldn't be good while the nitro I do have doesn't have any such issues. 'Course, there may also be that I don't need a Beta blocker and the nitro's adequate for my case. Sure as hell gives me a serious head rush though ... :hmm:

The entire country was psychologically traumatized by the events of 11 September. I certainly was, at any rate, and I know many others that were. That was actually the goal of the attacks--to traumatize and terrorize, and the goal was achieved.

Some more than others. Consider, if you will, the survivors at the WTC. I don't know if you've ever heard of "survivor's guilt" but many of them suffered/suffer from that.

Maybe it's psycho-somatic, but I happen to think that my use of beta blockers had something to do with my eventual rejection of the OCT. Did the drugs help me overcome the trauma caused by the events of the day? It's quite possible, even probable.

I mentioned some time back that it didn't require a conspiracy theory to mentally and/or emotionally reject the idea that people intentionally flew airplanes into the WTC & Pentagon plus intended to do so into the White House or Capital Building. Around 3000 people lost their lives that day in a series of events that were well outside the norm and some still can't accept it. Not that it happened according to the OCT or some other conspiracy theory but that it happened at all. When I first heard about it, I was all but convinced it was an updated version of HG Wells' "War of the Worlds" broadcast and it took a while for me to finally accept the reality of it all.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Old buddy, it is always a pleasure to read your posts! I used to post in these threads, but admittedly my patience wore out. But you along with a lot of other posters here (too many to mention), offer a lot of good and well thought out contributions that I'd have little to no hope of adding significantly to. So I am content to just lurk and siphon in information I did not know already :)

Awww ... :blush: ... I learned from the best when I first came aboard - at the time that being you, Boony and a couple others. That was in one of the UFO topics where I got to watch the Masters at work. You may want to look at Liquid Gardens' posts since he's of the same "school" even though he's comparatively new. Excellent mind and posting skills.

Oh, and by the way, I was not aware you were an EE. May I ask your specialty? I dabble in RF/optical stuff.

Yep, Aeronautical and Electrical both at the same time. I didn't know what I wanted to be when I grew up (which has yet to happen, of course ;)) so I did both. My specialty was process control which included both digital and analog circuits plus the means to tie them to mechanical hardware. (I think what I wound up with is called "Mechatronics" now or a subset of it is.) On the EE side, I wound up designing and building a lot of one-off data comm boxes and test equipment for my employer and a radio telescope for myself. Well, other than ham equipment but that was all vacuum tube and largely military surplus.

Ouch :P

I finally got people here acclimated to the goat's presence and have since been trying to track down those two young lovelies in hopes of continuing our studies in "international relations." *sigh* ...

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anyone wants to discuss (in length) another topic please start another thread. No one is saying you can't discuss another topic, just do it in its own thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skyeagle (Welcome back)?

Thanks! :tu:

Got a chance to talk to a number of airline pilots including those who fly the B-757, and I visited my cousin in Las Vegas, who is a retired engineer from United Airlines at SFO and whose son is a B-767 captain for another major airline who also flew the B-757 for a number of years.

And finally, what flawless approach? It has been pointed out numerous times that it was far from flawless.

I heard that! :tu: That approach was not flawless by a long shot. In addition to damages to government property, perhaps we should send a bill to his relatives for damages incurred when he knocked down those light poles.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is that with the gear up or down?

It is very evident you have never been a member of the aviaton community. Did you really think that such measurements would have been taken with the gear up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever that flying object was I don't know.

In that case, you have no business asserting to people that the aircraft was not a B-757. Since you cannot account for the airframe of American 77 and its passengers and crew, nor evidence to backup what you say, then you simply have no case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kludge

Speaking of number crunching and degrees in aeronautics and such, have you ever visited the Pilots For Truth forum?

Somewhere in the Flight 175 section as I recall, some guys did some number crunching to determine the G forces required at the bottom of the Hani maneuver in order to clear a particular VDOT antenna there and still successfully the complete the low level move to strike the building. YOU might be interested in that, if for nothing else, to see if their calculations agree with yours.

How silly of them to forget that the maneuver Hani conducted was within the airframe limitation of a B-757 and was too slow to have been considered a standard 2-minute 360 degree turn rate for an aircraft. In his case, I could have taken a 3-minute nap and sipped a cup of coffee after awakening before he could have completed a full circle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, in other words, you don't know anything about photogrammetry, you don't know how an object's shape and size can be appear to be drastically different depending upon the lens being used on the camera, and therefore your claim of the tail being "too short" is yet another example of you just talking out your hind quarters.

Thanks for clearing that up. :tu:

Cz

Yes, I do know just a bit about photogrammetry, and I assume you know more than I do, which is fine by me.

It seems to me that if you were all the expert you think you are, and with 2 known values in the formula, you or one of the other believers would provide the thread with an overlay of a 757 profile against the backdrop of the building. We know the distance of the camera to the building, and we know the dimensions of a 757. It would seems some brilliant scientist could generate a diagram of the relative size of the airplane against the building, but maybe I expect too much? :innocent:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.