Can I convince PF's resident no-planers that AAL77 hit the Pentagon - #3

Discussion in '9/11' started by cjnewson88, May 27, 2016.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And despite your unsupported claim that "Most of airplanes do not have serial numbers", the FDR absolutely does have a serial number.

    Nor can you support your claim.
     
  2. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Round n round we go, where she stops ....

    Who says it is? What does that have to do with anything?

     
  3. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, you repeatedly never get a clue. You focus on one thing that makes no difference to hold onto your fantasy.
     
  4. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It makes all the difference in the world as already explained to you multiple times. It it didn't make any difference why is it included in meticulous detail in the NTSB manual? What "fantasy" are you talking about? That the serial numbers from the alleged recovered parts from the alleged 4 planes were never matched to the logs for any of the 4 claimed planes? That's not "fantasy", it's fact (unless of course someone can show otherwise).
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A manual for accident investigations. What happened is no mystery except for a few internet warriors.
     
  6. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The manual I'm talking about is called "Aviation Investigation Manual". And here I thought maybe you knew something about the manual. Are you saying since it allegedly was not an accident, it was intentional, that the NTSB manual does not apply or that the NTSB should not have investigated? Is there a specific non-accident investigation manual that I'm not aware of? If so, please post the link. Thanks.

    What happened was that it was not properly investigated, it's certainly not a mystery and it has nothing to do with "a few internet warriors". Are you an "internet warrior"? You seem to be fighting really hard to defend the indefensible.
     
  7. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You keep ignoring the fact that the cause was known and not a mystery. No need for an investigation to determine the cause. Everything they had was turned over to the FBI investigation since it was a terrorist attack.
     
  8. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And you keep repeating the same nonsense that has nothing to do with anything.

    So is that your way of saying there is no NTSB non-accident investigation manual that you're aware of? So if that's true then the manual I'm referring to is the only one. The NTSB did investigate according to official claims, despite your claims about "no need for an investigation to determine the cause". And if they actually investigated, they used (or should have used) guidelines and protocols from the only airplane crash investigation manual they have. And those guidelines and protocols include a forensic investigation into the recovered parts. But there's no evidence that shows that was done for any of the alleged 4 airplane crashes on 9/11. And there's nothing in the manual that I'm aware of that says anything about skipping any part of the procedures/protocols listed in the manual.

    You can repeat yourself a thousand more times and it still doesn't change the facts.
     
  9. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.
     
  10. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Something we can both agree on. At least you quit repeating yourself.

    Unfortunately you still haven't addressed the topic. To remind you in case you forgot, without a forensic investigation of the allegedly recovered parts, there's no way to physically ascertain that any the recovered parts actually belong to any of the 4 alleged planes that crashed on 9/11. So again, the answer to the question posed by this thread as to AA77 is that it can't be done. And the discussion should be over.

    But the question I have (which is not really part of this topic but is quite important and I don't see anyone else ask) is who is responsible for preventing that standard part of the investigation (outlined in the NTSB airplane crash investigation manual) from having been conducted and why?
     
  11. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    7,545
    Likes Received:
    2,702
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Imagine that you were 25 or 30 years old, and had just barely squeaked by your Commercial Pilot flight check, and that all you had flown were Cessnas and Pipers.

    Would you have been able to jump into a 757, commandeer the airplane and slit the throats of the crew, and then perform the maneuver required according to the official story, and operate that airplane at 100 knots over its redline speed?
     
  12. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I addressed the topic, you just can't comprehend it.
     
  13. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    7,545
    Likes Received:
    2,702
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is because your response is incomprehensible, specious and nonsensical.
     
  14. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    52,197
    Likes Received:
    11,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You don't need a commercial license to aim an airliner. Your pilot's skills not be first rate. The 9/11 terrorist pilots all had licenses.

    5 terrorists were on Flight 77. Some kill the crew, the pilot terrorist aim the airplane and die.

    Sure, no problem. The speed you name makes sense given it virtually dove into the Pentagon.I saw the log from the flight data recorder.

    Think of it this way. Say you get onto a ship. And you got some training to run the ship. And you find you are in the wheel house. Don't you believe you could aim the ship? Airplanes are not that different from ships.
     
  15. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not sure I can remember a post where you did.

    Don't be silly and insulting, there's nothing difficult to comprehend about the topic. It was started by cjnewson88 and he asks if he can convince PF's resident no-planers (whoever he thinks those may be) that AA77 hit the Pentagon. And I answered the question. That is that it can't be done based on what is known/unknown. It's quite possible but highly unlikely that a plane may have crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 but there's no way to know it was AA77 since there was no forensic investigation that matched the physical allegedly recovered parts to the logs for AA77. It's also possible that it wasn't an airplane at all, since they made sure to fail to or prevent a legitimate investigation and the evidence and lack of evidence makes the claim that it was a plane highly dubious. It doesn't mean it's impossible, it just means the whole story is questionable, as is everything about the OCT.
     
  16. Blues63

    Blues63 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,110
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's not hard to crash a plane. Are you aware of the fact that most pilot training is designed to avoid this event? Anyway, yours is another fallacious argument from incredulity and as such, of no validity.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Stop making sense.
     
  17. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    But there was evidence it was AAL77.

    Flight 77's FDR was found in the Pentagon.

    American Airlines debris was recovered in and around the Pentagon.

    Witnesses said it was either an airliner, a 757, and/or an American Airlines plane.

    The primary radar track from several radar stations track AAL77 from take off all the way to impact.

    The bodies of all the passengers were recovered inside the Pentagon and identified with DNA. 5 unknown DNA results were found. These are assumed to be of the 5 hijackers.

    Video shows an object with a colour scheme that matches an American Airlines aircraft.

    The passenger manifest of AAL77 that morning shows the name of 5 known al qaeda affiliates.

    The aircraft went missing and crash into a political target the same morning that al qaeda hijacked 3 other airliners traveling to the west coast.

    Finally, there is video of NTSB at the crash site, showing a serial number on a piece of debris recovered, talking about using it to confirm the aircraft.

    I struggle to understand how someone can then sit back and say there is no evidence that AAL77 crashed into the Pentagon.

    All of this information, and more, is available on my blog if you actually bother going to it Bob. Why haven't you?

    http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If there was all that "evidence" and it wasn't manufactured or planted, then it should have been fairly easy to match the serial numbers from the alleged recovered PHYSICAL parts (including and especially the alleged recovered FDR) to the logs for AA77 as required by NTSB investigation protocol. That there was no forensic investigation of the alleged recovered parts, not even of the claimed recovered FDR raises all sorts of red flags. And given all the scam official investigations, it's just one more failure that smells of a coverup. It obviously means nothing to OCT defenders, they never ask any questions about the OCT anyway, they usually dismiss everything that doesn't jive with the OCT. But unless someone can show that this was done and a definitive match was found for ANY of the alleged recovered parts to the claimed airplanes, it's quite significant to me. I ask questions, lots of them, I don't just take the US government's word on faith. Everything about 9/11 was and is still being covered up. We know that just from the mysterious 28 redacted pages that all of a sudden became big MSM news.

    You say:

    So where's the confirmation besides him "talking" about it? Do you have it?

    I did and I'm wondering why there's not one single question posed on your website about the OCT. I also question what prompted you to create that website in the first place. Actually I'm not really wondering, I have a pretty good idea.
     
  19. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    52,197
    Likes Received:
    11,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The devil makes me do it. :roflol:
     
  20. cjnewson88

    cjnewson88 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2013
    Messages:
    1,123
    Likes Received:
    22
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I'm sick of this canard.

    First, the NTSB was not in charge of the investigation, the FBI was.

    Second, when they know what aircraft crashed they dont need to match serial numbers.

    Third, I want you to back up your claim that it's NTSB "protocol" to match serial numbers. A link to an official source please.

    Not available so far as I can find. How many FOIA requests have you filed to get that information? Can you show me the copies of your email conversations with the NTSB asking them for this information, and/or the FBI? Thanks.

    I don't pose questions, I present evidence. I'm guessing you either missed the part where I link suggested changes to the 9/11 Commission Report, or you're a liar and haven't been to the blog. I'm guessing the later.

    To consolidate all the facts in a single place.

    I'm guessing this is the part where you vainly attempt to invalidate all the information on my blog by claiming that I'm being paid to do it.
     
  21. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    91,362
    Likes Received:
    22,771
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Learned a new word eh? Sorry you don't understand what happened but your inability to understand is not my problem.
     
  22. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So then I take it you believe it would have been an extremely difficult task to accomplish even though it's done routinely in all NTSB airplane crash investigations other than for the 9/11 crashes?

    That doesn't change the fact that the NTSB claimed to have investigated though. So you think the FBI was responsible for preventing the serial number match procedure? I wouldn't be surprised, they hid 27 boxes of documents from their PENTTBOM investigation from Congress and the 9/11 Commission and lied and claimed they gave them everything. So who knows what these people were up to.

    But you said:

    And I saw that video a long time ago. So why are you lying? Several posters in this thread have made that claim but not one has been able to back it up with anything other than hot air. The NTSB guy in the video is "talking about using [the serial number on a piece of debris] to confirm the aircraft".

    Well, there's the video of the NTSB guy (unless he's lying), then there's the NTSB manual, which I already posted the link to (including Appendix J) several times in this thread, check for yourself. Perhaps you should consider posting the link to the NTSB manual on your website if you want to "consolidate all the facts in a single place". BTW, I like your website, it's very informative and very well done. You just need to post all the facts, not just selected ones if you want to be honest. There are very serious questions about the Pentagon event, it's not just about what the US government would like us to know. There a lot they don't want us to know, such as the illegitimate investigations.

    I know, that's what I keep saying.
     
  23. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    52,197
    Likes Received:
    11,300
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Proof American Airlines Flight 77 hit the pentagon.

    [video=youtube;1cT8WWt61eg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cT8WWt61eg#t=105[/video]
     
  24. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    6,386
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where in the video is the proof that American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? There's not one single mention of American Airlines Flight 77 anywhere in the video. So unless you can point to where in the video anyone mentions American Airlines Flight 77 (maybe I missed it), you're just lying. In any case, eyewitness claims are not proof, they're just eyewitness claims. There are many other conflicting eyewitness claims that are not in the video. But what you posted is clearly a lie.
     
  25. SamSkwamch

    SamSkwamch Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2016
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    19
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bob, friend, please don't do this. There is way to much that people who want the truth and who have proven beyond scientific doubt that the governments's story is not posssible to even involve ourselves in such conversation. Even if there was no plane it does not matter. They could release a video tomorrow showing the damn plane just to make folks saying this (*)(*)(*)(*) look stupid, and then extrapolate to saying "look how stupid these conspiracy theorists are."
     

Share This Page