I would say this is a foundation. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/...ldnt-have-been-flown-way-they-were-flown.html Tell us how you're in a position to know whom I know.
LOLOL. A thread is evidence? I'll stick to pilots who know what they're talking about. Hani Hanjour did not employ a difficult manoeuvre. His turn and the subsequent crash were amateur according to those who fly (not Rob Balsamo).
Because any competent journalist wouldn't bite the hand that feeds them,so to speak,and you and the crowd you probably run with are FAR from competent
She didn't say it publicly. She just told me. Her bosses don't know that she told me. Journalists know they'll be fired or worse if they say something to a big audience at a big rally or something but they all tell their friend what's happening. Some of them feel dirty because they have to be propagandists. Here's some stuff you should check out. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_control_propaganda/Media_Control.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_page.html I know you won't be swayed by any of it though. Tell us why this guy wouldn't know what he's talking about. Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng
May I ask if you are a pilot yourself? If so, what sort of aeroplanes have you flown? Do you understand the meaning of Vmo? Can you appreciate jumping into an airliner after having flown only small planes?
All they needed was enough skill to keep the planes in the air,before crashing them.... They may have only flown small planes,but they had hours in simulators flying the big jets
Excuse me, but I don't respond to baiting. See the following for an explanation: [video]https://youtu.be/jZbUCoVEVsU[/video] See 4:50 and ff
An honest question is baiting? I was simply curious as to what credentials you might hold making you a judge of aerodynamic maneuvering. Jeez, touchy subject I guess. Heck, it appears you are not even a pilot with an answer like that. - - - Updated - - - And how do you know this?
My God,You cannot be THAT ignorant! http://www.publicintegrity.org/2001...es-question-criteria-access-flight-simulators
It is not relevant to the debate and I don't divulge personal details to truthers (previous stalking problems). This is not about me so quit it with that tactic. Ok? I could ask you the same question. "in your expert flying opinion, how do you know that Hani Hanjour couldn't make that turn". But you're not a pilot and it would be irrelevant to the discussion. The information is available for all of us to examine and to turn the debate to the individual is a mendacious line.
You are right--this is not about you. And not about me either. Thus I have no reason to believe your statement about the ease of the maneuver flown at the pentagon or at the towers. Reading your posts is rather like listening to Rush Limbaugh pontificate with BS--not informative and not enlightening. I will listen to the pilots who have spoken out regarding this issue, pilots who actually fly the 757 for a living. They say the maneuver is impossible, and I agree with them. Peace, out.
It's NOT impossible,given the mindset of pilots it's more like unthinkable The maneuvers were well within the skills of the hijackers flying the jets,as passenger comfort and flight rules didn't interest them
Sorry LS, it was an impossible maneuver to be flying the airplane at something like 100 knots over the redline as the story has it, especially considering the clown that was supposedly flying it. Add to that the fact that the FDR data was fabricated, and you have yet another beautiful fantasy told by the government and the media.
It was. It impossible period. There is zero evidence of such fabricated data. You always base your claims on lies
Now you're just making **** up, no one claimed it flew '100 knots over redline',and the 'clown' WAS a pilot and HAD done time in Boeing flight simulators Add to that your claim that the FDR data was 'fabricated' without a shred of proof from a non-partisan source
No, it's about your tactics. You would have if you bothered to open the video I posted for you. Flaming and baiting noted. Please refrain from personal attacks of no merit. It seems you can't be bothered opening the source I posted for you, but you have the energy to waste time on stupid insults. That is just more of the low calibre posting style I've come to expect from 9/11 truth. Well, watch the video and learn something. This is exactly the information you need. Why are you wasting time attacking people when you could be learning? Get to it.
The FDR presented by the government to the public claimed speeds that were about 100knots over Vmo. Warren Stutt wrote about that while interpreting the data from the FDR data. Dennis Cimino, an expert in FDR technology, examined the government data too, and he discovered that the FDR data was completely fabricated. It was not even assigned to an airframe, a hoax. So, if you go with Stutt the plane was 100 knots over redline, and if you go with Cimino all the data is fabricated. Considering there was no debris at the pentagon consistent with a wrecked airliner, and considering that those who did see an airliner fly by that day put its path and location in places that contradict the official story, one can conclude only that there was no flight 77 that struck the building that day.
I have not mentioned Loose Change here, and you offer a critique of that piece as an explanation of what you know about aeronautical questions? It's OK if you're not a pilot, and you should not be embarrassed about it. But, without flying credentials your opinions regarding aviation matters is simply uninformed opinion and nothing to take particularly seriously, with all due respect.
My, My, My there truly are some seriously confused people on this planet. Pssst, people are not laughing with you, they are laughing at you. Now back to tightening your tinfoil hat.
You still have trouble distinguishing from Vmo and Vne,Vne speed for a 757 is .84 mach,or around 625mph.....a speed AA77 never came close to As for stutt,his claims were disproved back in 2011 with the extra 4 seconds of data from the FDR recovered by the NTSB
100knots over redline? You know that it was then super sonic = nonsense? No debris found what fits to a an Airliner ... Are you serious? Take a closer look on all the photos done here and you will find enough! Of course most was not outside the building, but inside what is total normal if comparing to other crashes of Airliners into housed like for example in Amsterdam when an Israeli 747 crashed into a house block. What comes next? The impact hole was not big enough to fit for a Boing 777? If yes, forget it, because it fits like a stamp on the wall before the collapse of the building came if someone is seriously looking on existing images. The hole looks like this: ---O--- .... and this is looking like what? Wings + hull in the middle and when checking the length, it fits very well to a Boing 777! There was not all found what was expected, but some silly things like a passport of a person inside plane = impossible etc.? Make comparison to Amsterdam what was there found ... as you should do in general a closer look on this issue! The security cams did not recorded the plane, but only the gate cam does = proof it was no plane? Lol ... before claiming such silly things, anyone should first take a closer look on cam technology in matter of how many fraps such cams used at Pentagon or even the best available at 2001 had and then how fast the plane was. Wooops! it was not possible for the cams to record the plane with not more as a white flash on few fraps only! So please ... and finally: If it was not AA77 - Boing 777, what else was it then? Before you answer, forget to name any sort of missile or UAV, because this is utterly disproofed to be possible at all, simply nothing of them is technically able to make the huge destruction (= explosives) AND to make the huge fuel explosion together!
