According To Bts Flights 11 And 77 Never Existed Options

[phaeton666]

See also here for a graphical presentation of some FDR data and BTS entries for AA77.
BTW this should definitely be in the AA77 section...

This post has been edited by phaeton666: Jan 30 2011, 07:00 AM

[elreb]

BTW this should definitely be in the AA77 section...

Best we can do is copy and move to the correct section...

But can you explain why Ronni was selling AA11 in September 2007?

[phaeton666]

But can you explain why Ronni was selling AA11 in September 2007?

Hey, man, if you can get Ronni to answer this under oath before a court of law, this is your chance to write history.
Also, for whom did he sell it and to whom, and where is it now.
This is one lawsuit I would personally attend... I'm dreaming.

[tumetuestumefais...]

See my BTS database compilation for the 9/11 planes and flights. It was made last summer using comparison of the downloaded and online database (which differ, because they're generated differently - and that's probably all what is the Holmgren stuff about - he most probably never seen the real BTS database, just it's online representation...). There were still no records for "AA11" and "AA77" on 9/11, but there were records for "UA175/N612UA" and "UA93/N591UA". You can also find there the "AA77" fleet No. N5BPAA.

[elreb]

I forget which one it was...either 0011 or 0077...didn't ever fly on Tuesdays but 9-11 was a Tuesday...hum

[727fan]

Here's the radio transcript between Boston Tower and Flight 11, beginning with the gate departure:

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/national...T-FLIGHT11.html

For Flight 77, there exists a transcript, too. But I'm too lazy to search it. Google is your friend.

Woody, first you deserve a big thank you from anyone who wants to learn more about what really happened, so Thank You.

Now is any person always right? It was not right of people to attack you, or call you a disinfo agent.

If you are honest with yourself, you will see that even you cannot always be right.

This is relevant now even though I deeply respect you personally and your work also and have learned a tremendous amount from your very informative woodybox blogspot blog, most especially about Cleveland Hopkins Airport, the likelihood that some or all were plane swaps, Delta 89 and 1989, and many others.

It is true that for many years The New York Times was considered one of the top newspapers. And they printed the story about Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers which was important for the public sentiment to turn against the Vietnam War due it being perpetuated as lies by the government. But that all changed between the early 70s and 2001, because whatever "findings" anyone comes up with to solve the terror crimes of 9/11/01, we must consider the source.

The terror crimes of 9/11/01 could not have had anywhere near the level of success that they did in emplacing fear, shock etc. into the citizens without the explicit, direct participation of the media. All stations broadcasted the same fake videos that were prepared in advance by the government.

It would be completely irresponsible to accept as proof of the existence of flight AA11 the report in the New York Times you link to above. That story is 100% able to be fabrication fed to / placed into the media by the government, exactly like the staged videos, and the much more recent killing of osama fraud.

While taking apart that whole transcript would be detailed and take some space [maybe a future post, except to say right away here, even despite the deep shock and pain, and confusion and abundance of emotion immediately following, it still seems that one month and 5 days later in the age of computers and internet is a really long time to await a transcription that probably took less than an hour or two of work to prepare, and it could have taken up even less time than that to come up with a fabricated transcript], everyone needs to understand that even if we got a tape of ATC recordings of Boston Center and Logan Tower for the morning of 9/11/01, that would be data most likely through a FOIA request, so provided by the suspects, and easily altered or fabricated.

As part of the Vigilant Guardian exercises that were taking place that day [and this would really be true on every day of the year any way], the US government and military have the authority to enter at will into the ATC transmissions, they easily could have and probably did in fact actually record those words if anyone could get the real, true, original recordings of that morning, even then it does not prove that the plane flew.

And since from your own high quality research and others here I learned that there is close to certainty that there were 2 flight 93s and up to 3 flight 175s, and the story of the pilot who claimed he was right behind and next to go after one of those flights is something that needs more examination.

Currently am unaware of any actual witness accounts of the take off of AA11 (sorry, once again, that NY Times link above is not proof, it could have been completely produced, even by the perps on the true ATC recordings that will likely never be known for certain).

Even if they took off, the 2 flights that were not in the BTS database until 2004, this is not some simple error or omission, like AA forgot to send the data for those 2 flights that day, no.

Even if at least 2 different planes took off for all 4 supposed flights, it has been established for certain that AA77 did not crash into the Pentagon [all of Craig Renke and Aldo's extensive in depth work], and that flight 93 did not crash in PA.

Whether or not the "Flight X" mystery plane you describe landing Cleveland Hopkins at 1045AM is one of the 4 supposed aircraft, it is likely an important part of the story.

No parts of AA11 were recovered from WTC or found there. Even if the transcript is 100% true and that plane flew and took off from Logan on 4R, it doesn't mean that aircraft crashed into the WTC at 846AM or at all.

[Diogenes]

No parts of AA11 were recovered from WTC or found there. Even if the transcript is 100% true and that plane flew and took off from Logan on 4R, it doesn't mean that aircraft crashed into the WTC at 846AM or at all.

exactly. The forensic identification evidence for all these flights is utterly laughable and pathetic...No other major airliner crash or disaster magically evaporates its evidence the way "9/11" did. Or atleast, at no time before has the govt been so secretive about any identified parts of a crashed major airliner.

doesn't flight 175 lack identifiable parts too?

Additionally, we even now know that the major network "live" video coverage of the WTC crashes are crude digital forgeries and duplicates. The 5 major networks and the so-called "independent" filmmakers like the Naudet brothers (these are all govt ops) had videos of laughable artifacts and glitches of pre-fabrication, digital rendering, pre-editing and overlaying, and inconsistencies.

many of the publicized alleged "victims" photos are also nothing but crude forgeries, duplicates with minor alterations, computer-matrix generated faces, and even a black face photo and a white face photo for the same person!

www.septemberclues.info has this info including its forums.