Got the b******

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

Hi Snowy - I don't get it

The general consensus is that no plane hit the Pentagon

[Andrew Johnson]

Congratulations on compiling all this SG.

If the data is faked, then it supports the notion that no plane hit the pentagon. This conversation appears to show that evidence is still being covered up by the NTSB:


Link

[Snowygrouch]

TWSU3,

Yes that IS the general consenus; for people who ignore about 100 eye witnesses, plane parts and 5 smashed light poles.

I dont really give a F*** what the general consenus is anyway I do my OWN thinking and research.

The point IS, that I can prove the US govt. provided a FAKE black box data recording.

A PLANE certainly DID hit the building, it just wasnt Flight 77....

Its about time we started using things like EVIDENCE here; isnt it.....or wait is it just me?

>C

[Stefan]

Excellent work, thank you SnowyGrouch!

[Andrew Johnson]

[insidejob]

Sorry, Snowygrouch, I still don't get it. You say that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon and the Pentagon are lying. OK, with you there. Then you say another plane hit the Pentagon. And there's where I've lost you.

The reason that people ignore the 100 or so witnesses who say they saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon is that:
i. there is no physical evidence to support this, and
ii. it is very, highly unlikely that a passenger plane could have been flown into the Pentagon in terms of the official story.

There are no plane parts that make a Flight 77 hit the most likely. There are no Flight 77 engine remnants. The plane could not have vapourised.

And as reported:
Former Vietnam Combat and Commercial Pilot Firm Believer 9/11 Was Inside Government Job
17 Jul 2005 By Greg Szymanski

Knowing the flight characteristics of the "big birds" like the back of his hand, Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."
Wittenberg claimed the high speed maneuver would have surely stalled the jetliner sending it into a nose dive, adding it was "totally impossible for an amateur who couldn't even fly a Cessna to maneuver the jetliner in such a highly professional manner, something Wittenberg said he couldn't do with 35 years of commercial jetliner experience.
"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying.
"I had to be trained to use the new, computerized systems. I just couldn't jump in and fly one," he added.
Finding more inconsistencies with the government story about Flight 77, Wittenberg recalled the recent statements made by a flight controller on an ABC 20/20 television program three months ago.
"If you listened to her carefully only an experienced pilot probably would have known that what she was saying was scripted," said Wittenberg. "Remember the transponder was turned off on Flight 77 and when this occurs, all the particular flight data like air speed and even the plane's flight identification goes with it.
"All that's left on the controller's screen is a green blip, that's it. But here you have this flight controller on 20/20 saying she was tracking the flight with specific air speed and other coordinates which was totally impossible once the transponder was turned off. How would she even have known the flight number? The whole story is a pack of lies and this is just another example."

So are you saying another 757 or similar hit the Pentagon?

insidejob

[Snowygrouch]

This is a point I`m trying to make here, ALL I CAN PROVE 100% is the faked black box data.

That is enough to get the bas****s, I dont know what DID hit the building and nobody on this forum or ANY other does either.

If you want my "opinion" it is that a medium sized military cargo plane did hit the building. Probably a fair bit smaller than a 757-200 but there are too many eyewitnesses and physical parts to say its definetly a missile.

What I`m trying to do here is stick to what I can ABSOLUTELY PROVE and no more. Thats what you'd do in a courtroom and for me this forum IS that courtrom.

If I could PROVE it was a missile I would. However I dont have the evidence to prove it either way so I`m open minded about it.

Do I think it was a 757-200????? NO.

Can I prove a missile????? NO.

Can I prove enough to interest my MP and the press???? YES.

Job done IMHO.

[THETRUTHWILLSETU3]

Here is another slant on this.

By all accounts Donald Rumsfeld was in his office at the Pentagon on 911

Let's assume he was in on whatever was about to happen.

Do you think he would stay in his office if he knew a plane was to be flown into the building - even if it was the other side?

Maybe no plane hit the Pentagon - just a fly by of a big plane followed by pre planned explosives.

[Woodee]

kudos on the research

[Woodee]

kudos on the research

[iro]

nice work - very interesting

[dontbelievethehype1970]

Good luck Calum.

I really hope you can get an answer to this very basic question.

Thats what no one on this forum seems to understand, is that we who want answers only need to ask certain questions, otherwise its all alot of hot air produced mostly by disinformers (maybe paid).

[flamesong]

Snowygrouch, this is excellent work. When some people say they have done research they mean they have checked out somebody else's research - you are a true researcher. I take my hat off to you.

So, please, please, please don't think I am being critical when I ask this.

In your interview, the interviewee says, 'it will be the heading corrected for variation [my note: and presumably, deviation] so it will be a magnetic heading'. Bearings are corrected from magnetic to true.

And I might be wrong about this as I only ever worked on military aircraft but I would expect the compass used in the recording of data would be a gyro compass, i.e. a compass which gives bearings as true readings - no correction for variation or deviation is necessary. The interviewee refers to a gyro system at the end of the second section.

Variation and deviation combined can cause huge magnetic/true differences.

[gypsum]

As usual, excellent work from you SG. Keep it up

[Snowygrouch]

Flamesong,
THX for the compliment, bear in mind there are 15 minuites of calls between myself and this guy. He goes into ALOT of detail but I cannot post all the calls at its way over the upload size limit.

The upshot is the plane is well under 20 years old (i have the data sheet from the FAA somewhere) and so has the lazer gyro system. Accurate to several decimal places.

An error of 6 degrees at 500 Mph will put you 1 Kilometer off course in 42 seconds to put that sort of error in perspective. Not the sort of error that you want!

He explained that even the old system has very sophisticated compensation systems that log changes in the earths magnetic field etc and are so exceptionally accurate.

C.

[chek]

[Abandoned Ego]

[insidejob]

Snowygrouch,

sounds good to me. Respect to Snowy.

insidejob

[andyb]

[tfayaz]

Well done Calum!

My take is with you and Andrew on this, there certainly was some sort of aircraft that hit the pentagon (Global Hawk with a missile) AND a very low flying 757. Not saying it was Flight 77, just an inkling that there definitely was a 757 around at the same time.

Toseef

[TimmyG]

really good work snowy
and i like your attitude. lets stick to proof. we have opinions and conclusions, we should be careful not to blur the line between them.

we need more people like you if we are to make any significant progress.

if you need more webspace to host your mp3s i'd be happy to upload stuff to my server. i've got plenty of space and a fair bit of bandwidth