And What About This Folks ?

[Roadrunner]

American Airlines have changed their own Wikipedia entry to state that Flights 11 and 77 never flew on 9/11 !!!

Their original entry until a few weeks ago was:

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).

But facts have now won the case. The new entry by American Airlines reads as follows -

Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and Flight 11 (a Boeing 767). Although these flights were daily departures before and a month after September 11, 2001. Neither flight 11 nor 77 were scheduled on September 11, 2001. The records kept by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/gis/) do not list either flight that day.

A Google check search of the IP address that made the change - 144.9.8.21 - located at American Airlines. Genuine.

Sounds to me like truth just can't be stopped. We at this 9/11 truth forum are celebrating.

Great !!

[truthseeker john]

[Mark Gobell]

[Roadrunner]

OK - so that settles it. The two flights were NOT scheduled for that day. And it's a fact that they did NOT fly. From that FACT the rest follows.


Period.

[John White]

Yes, it supports the Plane switch for RC drones theory: possibly

[Roadrunner]

To be fair, it also supports the theory that no planes hit the WTC. For, if these planes did not fly it's false to say the USAF failed to intercept them.

[John White]

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

We can say with certainty after 6 years that evidence for planes hitting the WTC (seeing that two of the alleged four flights are admitted, finally, not to have flown) consists as it always has done of sources and testimonies which are unscientific, unaccountable and unverifiable.

Nor can it be disputed that, unlike science, people who believe planes hit the WTC on 9/11 do so having 'seen them on TV' - and that the TV material itself was made and broadcast by those who are (and have always been) scientifically unaccountable. As of today we still have no willingness by these broadcasters to accept responsibility for the content of their 'plane' brodcasts. Nor even copies of the broadcast quality material. Once again unaccountability is the main feature. All of this runs contrary to science.

People believe therefore in sources which are shown to be scientifically unaccountable and they believe in things for which there is not, 6 years later, proof. This unaccountability is increasingly being demonstrated to be the chief reason for arguing that NPT is the most solid, scientific approach to these areas of study. It remains so until the evidence for planes is truly made available and accountable, scientifically.

In such a situation (where accountability meets unaccountability) it is accountability which is the main feature of what is true. And those hiding behind unaccountability are in no sense scientific.

Various attempts have been made to show the 'scientific' nature of planes at the WTC. But these are poor in content. They are contradicted by simple, elementary facts. Their authors are themselves prone to be unaccountable. Such 'pseudo-science' is laughable.

[chek]

[telecasterisation]

[Roadrunner]

Chek asks for facts to back up my statement that -

1. We can say with certainty after 6 years that evidence for planes hitting the WTC (seeing that two of the alleged four flights are admitted, finally, not to have flown) consists as it always has done of sources and testimonies which are unscientific, unaccountable and unverifiable.

Sure Chek. Here are two basic facts. The airline itself confirms these flights were NOT scheduled on 9/11/2001. My second fact is that these two flights are also agreed by the US aviation authority itself NOT to have flown. Those are two simple and very plain FACTS. They're not specially hard to understand, are they ? They are facts you and I and everyone else are forced to accept. Get used to them Chek. They ain't going to go away. If you need more simple facts, just ask. But don't make a bigger fool of yourself by denying what is now known to everyone. Just accept them. See ? It's not so hard, is it ?

2. You ask me to justify the following statement -

Nor can it be disputed that, unlike science, people who believe planes hit the WTC on 9/11 do so having 'seen them on TV' - and that the TV material itself was made and broadcast by those who are (and have always been) scientifically unaccountable. As of today we still have no willingness by these broadcasters to accept responsbility for the content of their 'plane' brodcasts. Nor even copies of the broadcast quality material. Once again unaccountability is the main feature.

In reply, which part of the above is untrue ? Yes, there are recorded testimonies and there are corporate archives. But there is NO accountability for the making of this material and, today, the supposed witnesses remain UNACCOUNTABLE. Once again, you can't even get your story straight. The unaccountability factor is a sure sign of fakery.

3. You also don't accept where I wrote -

People believe therefore in sources which are shown to be scientifically unaccountable and they believe in things for which there is not, 6 years later, proof. Unaccountability is therefore increasingly demonstrated to be the chief reason for arguing that NPT is the most solid, scientific approach to these areas of study.

Once again, can you show us ACCOUNTABILITY in these areas of research ? Give us the names of accountable executives for this 'plane' material on television. Or give us the names of accountable plane eyewitnesses ? You can't do it, can you ? So this material remains, as ever, NOT accountable for scientific scrutinty. Period. End of Story. Fin. The Completion. 6 Years Later a simple and never ending fact.

As for the rest of humanity, we believe that what is true and worthy of belief is ACCOUNTABLE and open to public scrutiny. Too bad that you've decided not to join us.

[Roadrunner]

Telecasterisation,

Yes, THOSE planes did not hit the WTC. I am glad you accept this. Since they were not scheduled, and since they are now recognised officially as not having flown, this is a simple fact. About time that this fact is recognised, right ?

You ask how the passengers are 'explained away' from these two flights. Well, your quesion is sort of strange. If you accept these two flights did NOT fly to which 'passengers' are you refering ? Stop and think about that. If the flights never flew which passengers of these mythical flights are you actually refering to ?

As for the mythical phone calls (long ago debunked as you can easily see on many forums) you should take the effort to see the huge amount of study done on them. They are fakes, like so much else on 9/11/2001.

You are right that the world is, today, the same as yesterday. That's because truth remains truth. As it always will.

[alwun]

Just one thing


If a person takes the view that no planes hit the towers, then that person is under no obligation to explain this aspect or that aspect of the mythical flights. OK? no asking please 'where are the passengers?, -- ask your own good selves 'where is the debris?' ' where are the claims for much recompen' se from the surviving relatives? these are YOUR questions to answer - get it?! not mine..or ours. Go ask the planehuggers who write in RED capitals -- remember them?? I do. I certainly do.

cheers Al..

[telecasterisation]

[chek]

[Roadrunner]

Telecasterisation,

The best way to resolve this issue is to ask the airline themselves - whose posts clearly agree these two flights never flew. That they were not even scheduled to fly on that day. A fact confirmed by the US Aviation authority. Seems to me that we must accept such facts. The rest, as they say, is common sense.

You must understand that one cannot prove a thing did NOT happen. That's to prove a negative. Science proves that which DID happen. Right ? Can you prove these two flights happened when, in scientific fact, they did not even fly and were not even scheduled to fly ? You see, the onus is on you to prove the opposite. It's not on those who know they never flew. It's on you to show otherwise. By facts. But now you see that you are arguing against the airline and the civil aviation authority who unanimously say these flights NEVER FLEW and were NOT EVEN SCHEDULED TO FLY ON 9/11/2001. So you see, you must first accept facts if you wish to contradict such evidence.

The passenger problem is your very own. For, as stated, the flights did not occur and were not scheduled for that day. We look forward to your evidence that these passengers and their baggage flew that day, since, according to the airline itself (as three times stated) there was no such flight on that day and none was scheduled. So, you see the real problems you have ? And all because you want to believe in what is false.

Why not make enquiries yourself and come back telling us what the airline says about the flight on that day ? Why not consult the aviation authority, who say the very same thing ? But please do not tell us that the onus is on us to prove anything about flights which never actually happened. That would be ridiculous.

What makes no sense is how you, an honest person, can not believe what is now clear. The two flights never happened. Nor were they even scheduled on that day. But can you believe those facts ? I hope you will agree with the airline and with the aviation authority. Then you will agree with everyone else. The official story of these flights hitting the Twin Towers is nonsense. It always has been.


_________________
There was a geezer at my school called Timothy Burr. His dad said it never occurred to him until his son was about five!

[Stefan]

The claims:

The planes were not scheduled to fly - it's official

1) If the IP of this wiki entry is traced back to a computer at AA - this does not equal an official statement from AA - this could be anyone from a CEO to a teaboy.

2) I agree with Roadrunner that AA should be contacted for their official position - as Roadrunner is making the claim, he should do this to support it.

3) Off the top of my head, an early version of LooseChange made this claim - the fact that it did not appear in later versions does suggest it turned out to be factually dubious.

If the planes were not scheduled to fly - it is a fact they did not fly

Assuming the planes were not sceduled to fly -

1) This does not prove there were no plane. The lack of scheduling could fit into any theory:

a) Official story - they were not sheduled to fly but there were changes to scheduling at the last minute (maybe mechanical problems with scheduled planes) and they flew instead.

b) RC plane theory - they were not schduled to fly as commercial flights - because they were not commercial flights but empty rc controlled planes

c) War Game transformed mid flight into terror attack theory - they were not scheduled to fly but were used by the military in a war game based around hijacking, which was then commandeered via rc and turned into a terror attack

And to be honest you could probably fit the "evidence" into any theory you liked.

What we in fact have here is a wikipedia entry which is not confirmed as fact, which when assumed as fact does not support the claims made on its back. Pretty much standard fare for the "researchers" really....

[Roadrunner]

So, is it seriously believed that the United States aviation authority would allow themselves to be misrepresented on this issue of the two flights ? Is it seriously believed that the airline, itself, would do so ?

The onus is not on No Planes. It is on those who believe those flights happened.

Let's have some evidence that the flights left the terminals. That they were boarded by these passengers - both of these things flatly contradicted by these statements.

The theory of planes is your own. Not others. It's up to you to prove and not up to others. But you can't do it. You never could. And now its official.

[telecasterisation]

[Roadrunner]

Nobody is avoiding anything. There were no flights for airport staff/airline staff to remember on that day that correspond to those two flights. In 6 years nobody at these airports claims to have been involved in these two mythical flights. Can you provide a witness, even a single person working at the departure airports of these two supposed flights ? No. How about baggage handlers ? Or those who ran the departure lounges ? No. Or a manager ? Or anyone connected with these mythical flights ? No. And now the airline itself says there were NO such flights. That they were not even scheduled !!! So does the aviation authority say the same thing. So what evidence is there, honestly, that such flights occurred ? None at all. We merely have the old tired story. And you see it doesn't fit. If there are lots of people who knew these two flights happened where are they ? Just produce some. Is that asking too much ? After all, it's your own theory. But you fail at the simplest, most basic request.

Why not go back to the drawing board ? Produce proof these two flights happened. But you can't. You have to produce it because it's your own theory. So at what point do you accept these simple facts ? You have not a shred of evidence these two flights were scheduled or that they took off. 6 whole years later. Isn't it about time, when the airline itself and the aviation authority both say the same thing that contradicts all you believe, that you accept it ?

[truthseeker john]

[Mark Gobell]

Could the same could be said for those that think that planes did hit the building though TruthseekerJohn ?

[truthseeker john]

[Mark Gobell]

[truthseeker john]

[Roadrunner]

TruthseekerJohn,

You say there is 'clear evidence' to show planes hit the WTC ? Care to share some of this evidence with us ? Is it from sources that can be checked ? Waiting to see it, sure.

In reply to your comments on NPT -

1. You write 'apparently' there were no Flights 11 and 77 on September 11th 2001. Yes, right. You've got it. But do you accept it ? Please tell us in your reply. It would sure help clarify what you are saying.

2. You describe these holes in the towers as 'impact holes'. They are holes, for sure. But whether they are 'impact holes' caused by planes is the main issue. The existence of holes is not disputed. But they are NOT proof that planes caused them.

3. You say 'many people saw planes hit the towers and at least one witness observed ' That wasn't an American Airline'.

Great. Let's deal with this. First, of these 'many' plane eyewitnesses how many of them, today, are available to be publicly accountable for their testimony ? Is it many, few, or none at all ?

As for the Naudet film which shows a person saying 'That wasn't an American Airline', what does this prove. I mean, is that the sort of comment a person would make who just a second or so before witnessed a commercial airliner tragically crashing into a tower block ? It's absurd. It's as silly as witnessing a man being eaten alive by a crocodile only for a person to say, 'That wasn't a crocodile, it was an alligator' !! Such things are completely nonsense. And why SHOULD anyone have believed it WAS an American Airlines plane ? They had no reason to believe there was ANY plane near the WTC at the time when it supposedly struck. Once again, the absurdity is obvious.

4. The planting of wreckage occurred in two stages. We have film evidence, for example, that areas near the Twin Towers were already cordoned off that morning. With yellow plastic tape around the very area where a plane engine was 'found'. As for alumnium wreckage found on the roof near to the South Tower, what is to prevent this having been placed BEFORE 9/11/2001 ?

The belief that this aluminium wreckage survived in such intact sections after having been blasted thru the mighty steelwork of the tower is absurd.

The wreckage was (as at the Pentagon) planted. To this day not a single serial number of this plane wreckage is available. The onus is on you to provide it as proof. But you have not done so, 6 whole years later. Thus, on many grounds (including the fact that these two flights never happened) there is today no verifiable evidence that these two flights hit the Twin Towers. None at all.

Time to stop being deluded by what you believe happened and start to face the facts that your ideas lack accountability, open and verifiable evidence. Time to start realising, in fact, that the fanaticism is that you don't realise the bankruptcy of what you believe. No evidence. No accountability. No case.

[truthseeker john]

[telecasterisation]

[Mark Gobell]

That's the point TC.

Can anyone please supply proof that they require of both sides of the argument.

Superb. I applaud you.

And you were the one who clung to the "TV footage is real" and "everything else is suspect" argument IIRCC ?