IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
For Consideration Purposes: "9/11 Pentagon Flight Recorder Fraud Revealed"?!

rob balsamo
post Jul 5 2012, 10:29 PM
Post #21



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jul 5 2012, 07:15 PM) *
Now who's exaggerating?

The issue goes way deeper than posting the wrong map (even though the map posted was very close to what was actually witnessed versus the official path it was actually claimed to be).

Fetzer was, and still is, trying to tack NPT on to solid research by playing on words.

He started a thread at Veterans Today attacking Rob where the posters there are mumbling "disinfo" about this forum.

Dennis' presentation was a smack in the face to the NOC witnesses even though they are referenced in Fetzer's "newspeak" articles which include a flyover at the Pentagon but this second plane crap that nobody saw is tagged on to it. Did you watch that video amazed? If you still think that's "trivial" and I'm claiming to be the "Absolute Authority on Truth" for pointing that out, you're the one taking this personally for whatever reasons I can't fathom.


Well said OSS.

amazed, you need to do some research.


For example, how many twins have you flown in which you need to "stand on the right rudder" during departure, with both engines operating?

Many of the claims made by Cimino with respect to aero-knowledge are completely laughable to any pilot with more than a ME rating. And he now claims to have experience as an SO on a 727?

lmao.... it is clear why the FAA database doesn't list him as such. He is lying.

The fact he claims "We" throughout his presentation under our banner, when he has attacked our organization and me personally through his message boy Fetzer at VT, well... I can't say I am surprised. Dennis has flip-flopped many times over the years.

As I have stated before, Cimino is a good EE, but he has absolutely no clue of advanced aerodynamics.

If you make the same claims under our banner as Cimino has done with regard to aero-knowledge, expect many pilots to laugh at you as well.

amazed, have you viewed the video?

Have you read the following thread in full?
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21931
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 6 2012, 10:32 AM
Post #22





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I have communicated with Fetzer both here at PFT and by email, to which he always responds.

I am an equal opportunity critic, and have criticized some of his statements. Like most folks, he does not take criticism well, and tends to make personal counter attacks. I guess that's normal behavior, but of course there are exceptions to every norm.

Cimino made some errors? I guess that makes him human.

Nonetheless, he's willing to go public with his (and our) observation that the Emperor Wears No Clothes.

Right rudder on take off? Gosh, that's a pretty outlandish claim. Wonder if the rudder trim was set for his only takeoff in whatever kind of plane it was?

He is prone to hyperbole or exaggeration? Such weird behavior coming from a human, eh?

The government story is a damn lie. Everybody knows it but only a few are willing to talk about it. The government will NEVER have another investigation, no matter the commendable actions of PFT, AE911, or any of the numerous other organizations and individuals who seek the truth and want the government to admit the truth.

We are in the court of public opinion, which is not often civil. I guess I should get used to uncivil human discourse. Sometimes, the discussion and people must move on.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jul 6 2012, 12:33 PM
Post #23



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Jesus H Christ amazed. Did you watch the video or not!?

Did you read the thread that Rob linked to?

And I know you haven't bothered your arse to watch Cimino's video as the "right rudder" refered to is what he sees as missing in the horseshit FDR data for "Flight 77"! Not a flight Dennis had taken.

I know it may take more than 10 minutes of your time to actually read up on where this manufactured "aggro" originated, but rather than trying to paint those who actually take the time out to sift through the Fetzer clusterfucks as judgemental pricks (there, I said it for you), at least have the decency to find out what the problem actually is.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jul 6 2012, 04:15 PM
Post #24



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Jul 6 2012, 12:33 PM) *
Did you watch the video or not!?

Did you read the thread that Rob linked to?


Clearly he hasn't reviewed any of it, because if he did, he would know that all Cimino has done is make a fool of himself under our banner. Perhaps that was the intention?

amazed, you should really review the information provided for you, if not for the information alone, but for the comedy. Up to you...

For example -

One of the reasons Cimino claims the FDR is fake is because he didn't see the pilots "standing on the right rudder" during departure in the NTSB animation reconstruction.

Well, any real pilot knows that one would not expect to see something like that in a twin engine jet with both engines operating.

The only time "standing on the right rudder" is needed on departure is in a single engine prop aircraft due to P-Factor., or in a twin with critical engine out.

Jets don't experience a P-Factor, so obviously it won't be in the FDR data. Therefore, Cimino should not be using such an argument when attempting to claim the FDR is fake, as any real pilot watching him make such an argument will just laugh, discrediting everything else Cimino says in which a pilot may not be familiar, such as the electrical analysis.

Again, this is just one example of many where Cimino makes a fool of himself.... this is not a "mistake" on his part, it is Cimino trying to make it look like he knows what he is talking about as it pertains to aero-knowledge.... he doesn't have a clue and is a prime example of where a little knowledge can be more dangerous than having none..... he should stick to what he knows, electronics, and leave the aero-knowledge to real pilots.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 7 2012, 08:51 AM
Post #25





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



So did Cimino present any information at all that is authentic? Valid? Meaningful?

Or do his false/inaccurate statements nullify the rest?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jul 7 2012, 09:09 AM
Post #26



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (amazed! @ Jul 7 2012, 01:51 PM) *
So did Cimino present any information at all that is authentic? Valid? Meaningful?

Or do his false/inaccurate statements nullify the rest?


I watched Dennis' presentation from start to finish. You didn't.

QUOTE (onesliceshort)
This was the old Dennis I remembered and respected. Up until the last few minutes.

The "lightpole damage", Lloyd England and the gatecam footage are his reasons to believe that "something" flew through the directional damage path. And he failed to mention the NOC witnesses.


Here's Fetzer's video being debunked. And he knew it was fake.



Still no comment?





Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Jul 7 2012, 07:02 PM
Post #27


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,033
Joined: 16-October 06
From: dc
Member No.: 96



QUOTE
"Cimino is a good EE..."

"...it is Cimino trying to make it look like he knows what he is talking about as it pertains to aero-knowledge... he should stick to what he knows, electronics, and leave the aero-knowledge to real pilots..."


imo the most substantive contribution mr.cimino has made so far, is his break down of the minute technical aspects of data recording in an fdr, here in the first half of this post:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10340859

-that post really illuminated things for me, and i was surprised to find that it was posted as far back as 2007, because i readily recall it now with such ease. it really taught me some useful information, but having just searched the rest of his content here at this forum, i unfortunately i found the majority of his posts veering off into personal feelings on 9/11 as opposed to offering more technical fdr insights, which is his area of strength and expertise. and though im not a pilot, when listening to his presentation in the video, i felt he was trying to add weight to his argument by tossing in aeronautical jargon that he wasnt well-versed in, so it was part confusing and part unconvincing.

perhaps doing a 45 minute presentation on just fdr electronics would bore most to death and wouldnt make for a good public outing, but it would imo be the most beneficial single contribution mr.cimino could offer to the pentagon and 9/11 puzzle (i for one would certainly find it useful). but outside of that, especially when he also espouses the rather exotic 9/11 conspiracy theories, he is doing more damage than good - and if done under the banner of p4t, then by unwitting association that damage carries over and tarnishes the credibility/integrity of rob/p4t and even cit to some degree.

one could dismiss it all as personality and individual choice, but when mr.cimino turns a blind eye to the known existing evidence, namely the pool of NoC witnesses, then his motives and agenda can only be viewed as suspect. to be quite specific, the truth is the plane flew north of the poles and did not nor could not hit them, and denying that truth automatically voids you as a legitimate truth seeker.

in my humle opinion of course.

***

on a separate note, at one point in the presentation, mr.cimino speaks briefly to someone off-screen, whom he refers to as barbara. im curious, is that barbara honeggar?

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jul 8 2012, 03:51 AM
Post #28



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (paranoia @ Jul 7 2012, 07:02 PM) *
in my humle opinion of course.



well said p...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jul 8 2012, 09:07 AM
Post #29





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Yes P, that is the most fair critique of Cimino's work I've read yet.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Jul 8 2012, 11:36 AM
Post #30



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Delete.

Not worth it.

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Jul 8 2012, 04:18 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th October 2019 - 08:46 PM