911blogger.com — OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF 9/11 FLIGHT CONTRADICTED BY GOVERNMENT?S OWN DATAPilots for 9/11 Truth, an international organization of pilots and aviation professionals, petitioned the NTSB via the FOIA to obtain their 2002 report, ?Flight Path Study?American Airlines Flight 77,? containing crucial data from Flight 77?s Flight Data Recorder
Mar 25, 2007 View in Crawl 4
addiggtMar 25, 2007
It's a conspiracy maaaan...
mreguyMar 26, 2007
@Roger: "it's reason enough to reopen the investigation."YES!! That's why so many are persistent and determined. Because many things are obviously 'not quite right' on the surface, and once one scratches below the surface -- many things are extremely wrong (about the 'official story').
mageantMar 26, 2007
>Dug. There does seem to have been a shoddy or incomplete investigation. It's not evidence of a vast >conpiracy that the "truthers" will try to pin it on, but it's reason enough to reopen the investigation.Good. Now you will notice that despite there being good enough reasons to start a new, independent investigation, that the government will resist such an investigation with every inch of their being. That is hardly the behaviour of someone who has nothing to hide.Watch the movie "9/11 Press for Truth" to see how the government resisted the last investigation.
fromthecoloniesMar 26, 2007
How can there be such a huge difference between the 9/11 Commission Report and the NTSB versions of the final approach of flight 77 into the Pentagon? The Commission says to right of Citgo gas station and NTSB and also witnesses say to the left. Then the altitude shown by NTSB is too high and the plane would have flown over the Pentagon. How did the light poles get hit when the plane was not anyway near the poles, on a different path and way above them? It also does not fit with the security video showing the alleged low crossing of the lawn and the impact. This huge discrepancy in the "official story" and the unwillingness to answer simple questions shows again the government and its agencies are all lying and covering up what really happened. 9/11 was an inside job, period!
daddyd6Mar 26, 2007
This is another red flag waving in our face, maybe we can snap out of our hypnotic trance now!
savitrMar 26, 2007
The government has (or had?) many videos of some aircraft crashing into the Pentagon. There were many security cameras going that day. The government released five frames only from one of those cameras only. Those frames are confusing at best, and appear to have been tampered with, we hear. Why does the government keep the other footage from public view?One terrible problem for the official version of that day's events is the fact that seasoned pilots can't make the maneuvers that this aircraft made, in order to hit as it did. We are talking about loops in the air and incredible precision gliding at absurdly low altitude and high speed. People can't do that. But robots can. The aircraft was on remote control, it would appear.
honestjoeMar 27, 2007
@RogerStrongI am glad that you can see that there is reason enough to reopen the investigation of 9/11. So I dug your first comment up.The testimony of 9/11 Commissioners Thomas Kean, Jamie S. Gorelick, Timothy J. Roemer, John J. Farmer, Jr., Max Cleland who admitted that they were lied to and or purposely deceived is enough to see that the omission report was nothing more than a cover up. The 9/11 omission report is a huge cover up by ignoring the evidence such as the hundreds of eyewitness reports of explosions throughout the Twin Towers by doomed victims, survivors, emergency service personnel, reporters, and bystanders, the 9/11 Commission Report contains virtually no mention of them and entirely ignores them in its conclusions. Also Secretary Mineta's testimony is entirely omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report. His testimony directly contradicts the 9/11 Commission Report in two key points. What about building 7? I can go on and on. They ignore so much evidence and testimony its criminal.If you can explain the collapse of WTC #7 without eplosives you shoud let NIST know seeing how they still cant figure it out. The ASCE WTC investigation, the FEMA Report, the Weidlinger study, the 9/11 commisssion report and NIST have not been able to explain the collapse of WTC #7 still to this day.Also what about the fact NIST report does not mention FEMA’s puzzling sulfur residue!Note that sulfur is:“The most popular vaporizing agent due to the fact it lowers ignition temperature for most pyrotechnic mixtures.” --From the web page: Pyrotechnic Chemicals<a class="user" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040415193823/http://members.aol.com/PyRoKiNg29/pyrochem99.html">http://web.archive.org/web/20040415193823/http://members.aol.com/PyRoKiNg29/pyrochem99.html</a>NATIONAL STANDARD FOR FIRE INVESTIGATION: NFPA 921. Sec 12-4: Unusual residues ...could arise from thermite, magnesium or other pyrotechnic materials! That seems like some thing that should NOT be ignored as it has been.@RogerStrong you said:"and in any conspiracy it would have been easy to manufacture evidence linking Iraq to 911 - but that didn't happen. Who the hell want's to manufacture a reason to invade Afghanistan?"Iraq was relatively free of terrorists because Saddam, although not a nice guy by any means, hated terrorists and had them publicly executed. Thats why Bin Laden referred to Hussein as an atheist infidel leader.Since there were no A.Q. in Iraq so they had to get there ISI trained A.Q. patsies from Saudi Arabia where OBL was from and where they get much of their money. According to U.S. intelligence reports the Saudi government played a direct role in funding 9/11. The Saudi government with its members of the Saudi Royal Family and members of the Bin Laden family with close ties to the royal family! Notice that we did not attack those most resposible for 9/11.911 was the perfect excuse to launch pre-emptive wars. They had been wanting to attack Iraq for years before 911. Look at the evidence:1998, how to attack Iraq...<a class="user" href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/AttackIraq-Nov16,98.pdf">http://www.newamericancentury.org/AttackIraq-Nov16,98.pdf</a>It is a FACT that there was a specific time frame for invading Afghanistan on the table before 9/11.July 21, 2001: US Official Threatens Possible Military Action Against Taliban by October if Pipeline Is Not Pursued Niaz Naik. [Source: Calcutta Telegraph]July the 30th 2001 a big picture of Osma bin laden was published and it says. It's time to fight back against terrorism.<a class="user" href="http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20010730.pdf">http://www.newamericancentury.org/defense-20010730.pdf</a>On October 7, 2001 the carpet of bombs is unleashed over Afghanistan. Hamid Karzai, the former Unocal consultant, is installed as head of an interim government. Subsequently he is elected President of Afghanistan, and welcomes the first U.S. envoy---Mr. John J. Maresca, Vice President for International Relations of the Unocal Corporation, who had implored Congress three years previously to have the Taliban overthrown. Mr. Maresca was succeeded by Mr. Zalmay Khalilzad---also a former Unocal consultant. (Mr. Khalilzad has since become Ambassador to Iraq.)Presidents Karzai of Afghanistan and Musharraf of Pakistan meet on February 8, 2002, sign an agreement for a new pipeline, and the way forward is open for Unocal once more.The Afghanistan President, and both the Afghan and Iraqi Ambassadors - all former Unocal Consultants.“So where is the oil going to come from?… The Middle East, with two-thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies.”Richard Cheney - Chief Executive Of Halliburton