911 inside job - for what?

[skyeagle409]

Just curious skyeagle..

Didn't the flight pattern of 77 show a tight loop?

I wouldn't call it a tight loop because the aircraft did not complete a full circle and was actually in a descending right bank.

I took these photo attachments of a C-17 conducting an even more drastic 360-degree descending maneuver to a landing. The same maneuver is also conducted by the giant C-5 transport and KC-10 tanker where they are cleared for the maneuver from 10,000 feet and on down to ground level, which is an altitude much higher than the altitude Hani began his maneuver and remember, he didn't even complete a full 360-degree turn unlike the maneuver you see in my photos and yet we are being led to believe the Hani maneuver required super-human strength and was over-stressing the airframe.

Such claims simply tell me those people do not know what they are talking about because I have conducted similar maneuvers during my check ride as a student pilot and at no time did I come even close to over-stressing the airframe.

Edited December 26, 2013 by skyeagle409

[RaptorBites]

Just curious skyeagle..

Didn't the flight pattern of 77 show a tight loop?

According to whom and what data was used to determinehow tight the loop was?

I honestly do not understand how tight the downward loop is to be of any relevant significance.

[Babe Ruth]

In the first place, it wasn't a loop, if we're going to use precise terms. It was a descending turn of something over 270 degrees, according to the official story and its radar tracks. I am most skeptical of the radar data, but if one accepts that it's true and accurate, Hani made an over head approach from 7000MSL approximately overhead the Pentagon.

If the turn was at standard rate it would have taken something less than 2 minutes, but if we round up to 2 minutes, his rate of descent was 3500 FPM, a significant number. Take a bit off the 2 minutes mark, and the vertical required is closer to 4000FPM.

With that rate of descent, the Gs required to stop the descent are significant, I think something around 5. If one accepts Stutt's calculations from the NTSB data, the airplane was doing 470 knots, about 120 over Vmo. An absurd bunch of numbers, but that's what the government story demands.

To believe that a 350 hour pilot called "lousy" by at least 2 of his flight instructors could perform this maneuver, first time ever in a Boeing, is the pinnacle of gullibility, assuming one is familiar with aviation and aerodynamics.

[The Silver Thong]

Because It is not everyday a commercial airliner flies into the Pentagon.

Let's take a look at the data. Take a look at references; "E" and "F" and notice how sloppy the flight profile becomes whenever the autopilot is disconnected. The fact the autopilot was disengaged and reengaged shows that American 77 was not flown by remote control.

That graph does not explain how the plane flew 6 meters off the ground for a km.

[The Silver Thong]

She didn't lie. She was simply taken out of context.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:OBriensLetter.pdf

The FAA letter she wrote.

[/background][/size][/font][/color]

Sounds like a retraction from out side forces. As soon as someone claimes someone did it (falsify a statement) for gain makes me wonder, what gain. I don`t make one red penny from questioning the official story. However those that go against the official story seem to have far much more to lose.

[The Silver Thong]

I wouldn't call it a tight loop because the aircraft did not complete a full circle and was actually in a descending right bank.

I took these photo attachments of a C-17 conducting an even more drastic 360-degree descending maneuver to a landing. The same maneuver is also conducted by the giant C-5 transport and KC-10 tanker where they are cleared for the maneuver from 10,000 feet and on down to ground level, which is an altitude much higher than the altitude Hani began his maneuver and remember, he didn't even complete a full 360-degree turn unlike the maneuver you see in my photos and yet we are being led to believe the Hani maneuver required super-human strength and was over-stressing the airframe.

Such claims simply tell me those people do not know what they are talking about because I have conducted similar maneuvers during my check ride as a student pilot and at no time did I come even close to over-stressing the airframe.

Only an aircraft with an IFF transponder (militery) can enter pentagon airspace. Why did a passanger jet have an IFF transponder and if not why was it not shot down from the air or the ground.

[RaptorBites]

Sounds like a retraction from out side forces. As soon as someone claimes someone did it (falsify a statement) for gain makes me wonder, what gain. I don`t make one red penny from questioning the official story. However those that go against the official story seem to have far much more to lose.

"Sounds like" and "is" a retraction from outside sources are completely different things.

I'd like to see proof or evidence of coercion, but both you and I know that it is really difficult to do so. Hence the statements of supposition on your part.

[RaptorBites]

Only an aircraft with an IFF transponder (militery) can enter pentagon airspace. Why did a passanger jet have an IFF transponder and if not why was it not shot down from the air or the ground.

IFF transponders are also used in civilian aircrafts. Although not the typical military modes, IFFs are installed.

The Pentagon airspace isn't that secure. Ronald Reagan Airport is just a few miles away. When I went to visit my cousin who lived in DC, the plane flew close enough to the pentagon during landing procedures to take a photo with a cellphone.

Why would the Pentagon have restricted airspace being so close to a major Airport??

[The Silver Thong]

IFF transponders are also used in civilian aircrafts. Although not the typical military modes, IFFs are installed.

The Pentagon airspace isn't that secure. Ronald Reagan Airport is just a few miles away. When I went to visit my cousin who lived in DC, the plane flew close enough to the pentagon during landing procedures to take a photo with a cellphone.

Why would the Pentagon have restricted airspace being so close to a major Airport??

Why would the Pentagon have restricted airspace being so close to a major Airport??

I would think because its the Pentagon and not to have restricted airspace would be pretty dumb. Oh wait it does have restricted airspace and also has it`s own radar system call p-56. It has Andrews air 10 miles away it has anti aircraft misiles. But that also didn`t work that deadly day, oh my.

As you so like to say, prove that Washington DC the White House and the Pentagon is not protected from air strikes...

Edited December 26, 2013 by The Silver Thong

[The Silver Thong]

"Sounds like" and "is" a retraction from outside sources are completely different things.

I'd like to see proof or evidence of coercion, but both you and I know that it is really difficult to do so. Hence the statements of supposition on your part.

Who gained the most from 911.

Was it you or me. Answer what I asked pages back that you brushed off. Who gained the most and that will be the end of this as to who or why it happened.

Edited December 26, 2013 by The Silver Thong

[skyeagle409]

Who gained the most from 911.

Was it you or me. Answer what I asked pages back that you brushed off. Who gained the most and that will be the end of this as to who or why it happened.

Definitely not the United States! In the short term, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda benefited from support gained shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attack. The U.S. military has been broke and services cut over the years since the 9/11 terrorist attack and America will be spending trillions of dollars caring for war veterans; trillions of dollars that could have been spent elsewhere.

[The Silver Thong]

Definitely not the United States! In the short term, Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda benefited from support gained shortly after the 9/11 terrorist attack. The U.S. military has been broke and services cut over the years since the 9/11 terrorist attack and America will be spending trillions of dollars caring for war veterans; trillions of dollars that could have been spent elsewhere.

So private industry benifited and not the tax payer. Speaks volumes when private interest consumes a people to the point that being lied to is a norm. I would be p***ed if I where you.

Your grand kids will still be paying for the lies you like to share.

Edited December 26, 2013 by The Silver Thong

[Czero 101]

Why would the Pentagon have restricted airspace being so close to a major Airport??

I would think because its the Pentagon and not to have restricted airspace would be pretty dumb. Oh wait it does have restricted airspace and also has it`s own radar system call p-56. It has Andrews air 10 miles away it has anti aircraft misiles. But that also didn`t work that deadly day, oh my.

Have you actually, you know... LOOKED at the proximity of The Pentagon and Ronald Regan National?

The approach for Runway 15 is right over top of the Pentagon.

How would you propose to restrict that airspace exactly....?

As you so like to say, prove that Washington DC the White House and the Pentagon is not protected from air strikes...

It's your claim that it is. You prove it. Don't use the typical CT cop-out of demanding someone prove a negative.

Cz

Edited December 26, 2013 by Czero 101

[The Silver Thong]

Have you actually, you know... LOOKED at the proximity of The Pentagon and Ronald Regan National?

The approach for Runway 15 is right over top of the Pentagon.

How would you propose to restrict that airspace exactly....?

It's your claim that it is. You prove it. Don't use the typical CT cop-out of demanding someone prove a negative.

Cz

Ok so lets say the most powerful nation on the planet had no security around it`s hart. Prove that it had no security against attack. See how this goes around and around when shills use false goverment propaganda. Hence the lead up to war, an illegal war for profit by few. Prove people in private industry did not profite from 911.

Prove to me a IFF transponder was on a commercial jet liner.

Spouting so called evidience from the very people that commited the crime does not work.

Edited December 26, 2013 by The Silver Thong

[Stellar]

The approach for Runway 15 is right over top of the Pentagon.

How would you propose to restrict that airspace exactly....?

That is a very interesting point. I would be quite interested in hearing TST explain how he believes the Pentagon does secure itself, given this fact.

[The Silver Thong]

[/background][/size][/font][/color]

That is a very interesting point. I would be quite interested in hearing TST explain how he believes the Pentagon does secure itself, given this fact.

35 min into the flight the plane was hijaked. How far away from DC would that plane have gone befor re-entering DC airspace again. I don`t know you tell me.

[RaptorBites]

Who gained the most from 911.

Was it you or me. Answer what I asked pages back that you brushed off. Who gained the most and that will be the end of this as to who or why it happened.

I didn't brush it off, I answered it exactly how it needed to be answered.

Neither you or had gained anything from 9/11.

That is besides the point. You made the claim that if you follow the money you will know why or who perpetrated 9/11.

Your claim, your burden to prove it. You have yet provided a correlation between people who profited from the attacks other than they got rich.

Like I said previously, people will profit off events large and small, that doesn't make them guilty of commiting a crime.

Ok so lets say the most powerful nation on the planet had no security around it`s hart. Prove that it had no security against attack. See how this goes around and around when shills use false goverment propaganda. Hence the lead up to war, an illegal war for profit by few. Prove people in private industry did not profite from 911.

Prove to me a IFF transponder was on a commercial jet liner.

Spouting so called evidience from the very people that commited the crime does not work.

It's your claim that the plane had an IFF transponder. Why do we have toprove you wrong when you should be proving yourself right?

[RaptorBites]

35 min into the flight the plane was hijaked. How far away from DC would that plane have gone befor re-entering DC airspace again. I don`t know you tell me.

Again attempts at reversing the burden of proof is staggering.

Stop trying to run and start proving your own claims.

[The Silver Thong]

I didn't brush it off, I answered it exactly how it needed to be answered.

Neither you or had gained anything from 9/11.

That is besides the point. You made the claim that if you follow the money you will know why or who perpetrated 9/11.

Your claim, your burden to prove it. You have yet provided a correlation between people who profited from the attacks other than they got rich.

Like I said previously, people will profit off events large and small, that doesn't make them guilty of commiting a crime.

It's your claim that the plane had an IFF transponder. Why do we have toprove you wrong when you should be proving yourself right?

Just as I thought. You don`t want to follow the money. You don`t care the US government lied to go to war, you don`t care the US government used privet profitiers to commit war crimes.

The easiest way to justifiy what you want to believe is to just go with what the authorities say. That is the most simple way to travel, and also the safest. Till it comes back to bite you. The US is a changed nation and not the gem it once was. Hard to let go of but I understand why you and such deffend such a crime organization. It raised you to be obedient.

[The Silver Thong]

Again attempts at reversing the burden of proof is staggering.

Stop trying to run and start proving your own claims.

so you can`t answer the question.... 35 min out of DC and it came back and know one thought hmmm this is strange.

[The Silver Thong]

Again attempts at reversing the burden of proof is staggering.

Stop trying to run and start proving your own claims.

Your inability to prove what the criminal states as truth is stagering. Unless you want to use the criminals testamony ( I didn`t do it) as proof you win.

[RaptorBites]

Just as I thought. You don`t want to follow the money. You don`t care the US government lied to go to war, you don`t care the US government used privet profitiers to commit war crimes.

The easiest way to justifiy what you want to believe is to just go with what the authorities say. That is the most simple way to travel, and also the safest. Till it comes back to bite you. The US is a changed nation and not the gem it once was. Hard to let go of but I understand why you and such deffend such a crime organization. It raised you to be obedient.

I answered the question. Just because the response wasn't to your personal satisfaction is really not my problem.

You have to show correlation, which you haven't.

[RaptorBites]

so you can`t answer the question.... 35 min out of DC and it came back and know one thought hmmm this is strange.

Stop trying to reverse the burden of proof. Your claim, you prove that it was strange. Your personal incredulity non-withstanding.

[RaptorBites]

Your inability to prove what the criminal states as truth is stagering. Unless you want to use the criminals testamony ( I didn`t do it) as proof you win.

It's not my position to prove the criminal is stating the truth. It is your position to prove the criminals are liars.

Can't prove a negative.

[The Silver Thong]

Stop trying to reverse the burden of proof. Your claim, you prove that it was strange. Your personal incredulity non-withstanding.

Typical

The proof is there and you have seen it. Your dedication to the government is noted as it seems they are more trust worthy. The entire planet knows the US is a lier and a theif. Do I need to prove that as well. I thought it was common knowledge.

I for one as a Canadian don`t trust my government as I have caught them lieing and theiving. To trust a known criminal and to deffend such makes you an accomplice to the crime.

Google the most corupt nations and yours is in the top 10 everytime. I will not accept a corrupt investigation just to appeise those that follow the line.