New Aa77 Animation Released By Faa Supports North Side Options

[rob balsamo]

We are better off pointing out why this animation is fraudulent rather than falling into their trap of embracing it as valid.

Craig,

I once again emphasize the fact that no one... is embracing.. this video... (bolded again)


But the fact remains... it is a video released by the FAA in support of "North Of Citgo" flight path, transitioning at Paik and corroborating Morin. Should we ignore it due to the fact it doesnt also support "East Of Potomac"?


Want my opnion? (even though you got enough of it (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )


We'll get to the "East Of Potomac" analysis.. .thoroughly...

Again.. the FAA supports your witnesses filmed on location as stated above. Where is your focus?


Again i ask.. should we ignore this video? There is a large space between "embrace" and "ignore". Which do you suggest we do? If we dont "embrace" (which no one ever claimed to have done), should we ignore it?

Hmmm...

[painter]

So far, I'm seeing what Craig is meaning, here. Once again (apparently, yet to be confirmed) a government agency is releasing data which A) does not support the government story and B) does not corroborate with the other, physical, evidence available. We know that the videos "released" allegedly showing AA77 striking the Pentagon are at best inconclusive and at worst completely fallacious. We know that the data allegedly from the FDR of AA77 is false and we know this because the data itself belies even the possibility that this FDR could have been found in the Pentagon rubble unles it was planted there by persons unknown after the fact. Now here we, apparently, have data which corroborates the north of Citgo flight path but which does NOT meet the criteria supplied by interviewed witnesses. There is no reason to accept this data as being anything more than further obfuscation and "burying the bone deeper" by the government. Their GAME is to keep us confused and arguing amongst ourselves. Lets not play their game.

There is a logical syllogism here:

'A' and 'B' can not BOTH be true.
If 'A' is true 'B' must be false.
If 'B' is true 'A' must be false.
HOWEVER 'A' and 'B' can BOTH be false.

The FDR and alleged FAA data is irreconcilable with the physical damage observed around and within the Pentagon; both can not be true.
If the north flight path is true, then the physical damage is false (created by something other than the north flight path aircraft).
If the physical damage was caused by an aircraft, it was not on the north-flight path indicated by the FDR and the alleged FAA data.
However, BOTH the FDR data and alleged FAA data AND the physical damage may have been falsified.

I believe both 'A' and 'B' are false.

I agree with Craig that in a criminal investigation if you have suspects that are giving you false sets of evidence, that falsified evidence is itself evidence against the suspects.

[rob balsamo]

We know that the data allegedly from the FDR of AA77 is false

Ok... let me make one thing very clear for the last time as im tired of repeating myself.

Just because elements of any type of data (NTSB, NIST, FAA, ASCE, the list goes on)... it does not automatically invalidate the entire set of data.. until each set is proven to be fradulent.

I have said this time and time again.. none of us will know exactly what happened on 9/11, mainly because we werent sitting in the jumpseat.

With that said, please try not to minimize conflicts offered by govt agencies. (this isnt directed at you in particular painter) as "whistleblowers" may only have one avenue.

Many people are putting their names, faces and professional reputations on the line. Im getting tired of the blanket statements of "fraud" as fact for entire data sets.

[painter]

Many people are putting their names, faces and professional reputations on the line. Im getting tired of the blanket statements of "fraud" as fact for entire data sets.

Alright, then as a point of clarification: Could the FDR whose data you have so thoroughly analyzed been found within the Pentagon rubble without having been planted there by persons unknown?

[rob balsamo]

Alright, then as a point of clarification: Could the FDR whose data you have so thoroughly analyzed been found within the Pentagon rubble without having been planted there by persons unknown?

You asking me to speculate? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[painter]

You asking me to speculate? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

No, not at all. You have analyzed the data. Given data trends, could the FDR from which the data is alleged to have come been found within the Pentagon rubble?

I'm asking as a point of clarification because if there is a "maybe" here, I sure as hell don't see it.

If I'm just being ignorant, you have my apologies and I'll butt out of this conversation.

[ungari]

As a tactic, this idea of the authorities releasing so many differing reports just might work.
If you deluge the sheeple with too many bits of info, they throw their hands up in the air, and say "who cares?".

[rob balsamo]

No, not at all. You have analyzed the data. Given data trends, could the FDR from which the data is alleged to have come been found within the Pentagon rubble?

I apologize for answering a question with a question...

But...

Could the FDR from which the data is alleged to have come been found within the Pentagon rubble?

Can an FDR be edited and planted more than 2 days after an incident in the weeee hours of the morning?

Painter... you have read these articles.. no?

Can The Govt Get Their Story Straight? - Location Of Flight Data Recorder

Lies, Conflicting Reports, Cover-Up's
Location of FDR Part II

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[GroundPounder]

This is an interesting thread!

For them (FAA) to offer up another flight path speaks volumes. Invalidating all the data coming from them would not be wise on our part. Suspecting all the data on the other hand, would be prudent.

This is somewhat analogous to attorneys sending the opposing side boxes and boxes of documents to sift through to get at the truth. Some kernels of truth and lots of extraneous stuff.

Of course, that still doesn't explain to my satisfaction the initial faulty flight path release by them.

The lack of a 'mea culpa' on the part of the FAA is unfortunate but completely expected.

Any idea why and who specifically released this?

[Craig Ranke CIT]

Craig,

I once again emphasize the fact that no one... is embracing.. this video... (bolded again)


But the fact remains... it is a video released by the FAA in support of "North Of Citgo" flight path, transitioning at Paik and corroborating Morin. Should we ignore it due to the fact it doesnt also support "East Of Potomac"?


Want my opnion? (even though you got enough of it (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) )


We'll get to the "East Of Potomac" analysis.. .thoroughly...

Again.. the FAA supports your witnesses filmed on location as stated above. Where is your focus?


Again i ask.. should we ignore this video? There is a large space between "embrace" and "ignore". Which do you suggest we do? If we dont "embrace" (which no one ever claimed to have done), should we ignore it?

Hmmm...

If you don't embrace it then good. That's all that matters.

Because once again, just like the NTSB data, we are not saying this should be "ignored".

It simply needs to be touted for what it is and what it is not.

It IS more government provided data that is irreconcilable with all other data and physical damage.

This is huge and very important.

But it is NOT legitimate corroboration for the witnesses because this is not where the plane flew.

It came from east of the river as described by Middleton and Chaconas AND it had a more pronounced north of the gas station bank over the parking lot like the ANC guys describe making it end up somehow over the south parking lot.

This new FAA animation is a great hypothetical example of a north side approach in general and no matter how you slice it this works in our favor, but it is not legitimate data that is accurately or honestly depicting where the plane really flew.

We MUST make this clear to people.

Painter understands perfectly.

This post has been edited by Craig Ranke CIT: Sep 13 2008, 09:05 PM

[GroundPounder]

Just a few more thoughts.

I don't like playing the gov's game but we are stuck with it I think. If there had been a verifiable chain of custody for the retrieved aircraft parts ( w/ part numbers) that could then be matched up w/ maintenance logs, I would be less skeptical about the strike. Less, but not relieved of, because I didn't see it with my own eyes. The NTSB's failures of late have become habitual.

While I like boolean logic ( I'm a programmer), somethings don't lend themselves to such discrete states. Without one definitive dataset of some sort to work with, we are stuck (playing the game) of piecing this thing together from all the seemingly contradictory data. The fact that the data is contradictory, boosts the confidence level that something is seriously amiss all the more.

My two cents worth ( I guess that's about one pre-1985 penny) (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[dMz]

They WANT it to be confusing.

I'm "siding" with Craig on this point... how far above 100.0000000000000000000000% can one allowably go? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/yes1.gif)

This whole FAA "release" caught me blindside like a meadowlark IMMEDIATELY in front of the proverbial speeding locomotive. I had other plans today RIGHT when the shan hit the fit...

No matter- I got my "hands" DIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRTTTTTTYYY! anyway- I've heard that I'm "good" like that. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

I hauled "the fish" into the boat very quickly- then I started "cleaning" said fish...

Fish had scales... overlapping, very thick scales...

Fish shows up this morning- while I'm busy flying in front of trains-- hmmm.....

I personally think "we" are OBVIOUSLY caught in a "black op"... everyone take a deep breath and just know that the "spooks" will do their 'thang-- those mostly-"conscience-optional" f*ck-sticks GET PAID for EXACTLY THAT (plus they dig the whole "vibe")...

I view spooks as more of a personal pain in my ass this many years later, but I'm a JADED mofo at this point.

--------------------
This morning, I "cut" into a straw herring, and inside its belly I found a TiNRAT! Cutting inside that TiNRAT and poking around, I was surprised to find a TCEOT inside the TiNRAT's belly!!!

FWIW, TiNRAT is Kevin Ryan's term for [NIST] They'll Never Read All That.

Who wants to be the first to guess what I mean here?

[And for God's sake- let's NOT lose either our focus or OUR COHERENCE- I think this is what Craig was saying, but I've been wrong before... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/dunno.gif) ]

[Craig Ranke CIT]

The fact that the data is contradictory, boosts the confidence level that something is seriously amiss all the more.

Exactly.

And I would never say that this should be ignored.

The fact that they released this the day after Rob's new presentation showing virtually the exact same hypothetical north side approach is all but proof they are directly reacting to our work.

[richard cranium]

This may be the wrong thread to post this but I'll throw it out there for the sake of more information. While watching the news on televison concerning the memorial at the Pentagon on 9-11-08 a reporter was commenting on the design of the cantalevered benches representing those who died on that terrible day. She stated that the benches for those who worked at the Pentagon were aligned so that they pointed toward the Pentagon. The benches for the passengers who died in flight 77 were aligned along the " flight path" of the airplane. From what I could see,it was aligned to the " south " approach.

It made me wonder if this was some kind of planned prapoganda/psychological thing.

Just a thought

rc

This post has been edited by richard cranium: Sep 13 2008, 09:18 PM

[Craig Ranke CIT]

From what I could see,it was aligned to the " south " approach.

It made me wonder if this was some kind of planned prapoganda/psychological thing.

Of course.

I definitely think so.

Or how about the massive triple spire air force memorial they put up right in front of the Navy Annex at the critical point where the flight path goes fatally off course.

It's almost like they represent 3 random directions for 3 flight paths of confusion.


(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Arlington%202007/Picture067.jpg)
(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Arlington%202007/Picture084.jpg)

[grizz]

I think the title of this thread says it best. The FAA animation supports the findings of Pilots and CIT. There is no need to embrace or reject it. It simply is what it is.

[dMz]

It's almost like they represent 3 random directions for 3 flight paths of confusion.

(IMG:http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lytetrip/Arlington%202007/Picture084.jpg)

Or-- it's some triplet collection of RF antennae... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

[Omega892R09]

Or-- it's some triplet collection of RF antennae... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

What, a kinda beam me in Scotty!

[dMz]

What, a kinda beam me in Scotty!

"We can neither confirm nor deny..." (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

EDIT: For those UAV/drone-"doubting Thomases":

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=11884

Be sure to check at least 40 or so of those cross-references for me.

[JFK]

Or-- it's some triplet collection of RF antennae... (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

What do you reckon the frequency would be ?

¿ plɹoʍ ɹno oʇ sıɥʇ op ʇı llıʍ puɐ