QUOTE (rossgs @ Feb 7 2008, 05:22 PM)
1. The government has simply stated, as far as I can tell, that FOIA requests for aircraft parts will continue to be denied until the FBI has finished investigating this matter. There is an explicit exemption to the FOIA on these grounds. Personally, I think that they should release the information, but I don't really follow your "unlawful argument". Perhaps you'd care to comment on that.
Here's a url which explains the exemption: http://www.osec.doc.gov/omo/FOIA/exemptions.htm
An investigation is ongoing? I thought they already had their man. Isnt that why our soldiers and innocent civilians are dying overseas at alarming rates?
Aidan Monaghan is the primary person who has requested this information. A govt watchdog organization (i forget the name, but its not Judicial Watch) he has contacted has said the excuse the govt used to not provide information was unlawful and will pursue the issue under legal grounds if the govt continues to stonewall. Aidan has the details. I'll make him aware of this thread. However, with that said, the FBI/NTSB can release FDR data which they claim is from AA77, does not support the govt story, but withold the part numbers due to "ongoing investigation"? When do you raise your BS flag rossgs?
2. Actually I didn't think that the original poster was asking YOU or anyone specific at PFT about what you thought.
The title of this thread specifically
references "PFNT". Sorry you missed it. You are not a member of "PFNT".
3. As I've mentioned to you before, the time change parts argument isn't really probative of the matter. If there's a cover-up, then showing a few parts which match to aircraft records or changing data bases to match what was found is not very difficult when compared to fooling hundreds of first responders, for example.
You mean these First Responders and Family Members/Victims
? CIT has more, including written letters. Let me know if you would like more.
Time change parts would be a good start
in trying to establish positive ID (as i have explained to you before when you brought up the argument, is your memory failing rossgs? This is the second time i had to remind you of something we spoke of). If you choose to accept anything you find on the net and what the govt tells you as gospel, you are certainly entitled. We are more skeptical of a govt known for lies and corruption.
4. Of course I don't have any records, but all "you" seem to have is one specific loose end that you want taken care of. This doesn't change the fact that most of the evidence points to AA77 as the culprit here. For example, the hundreds of people who saw a commercial airliner headed toward the Pentagon or the DNA matches to the people known to be on board.
The people who saw an airliner approach the pentagon do not provide positive ID. Unless of course you believe the Flight number was painted on the side of the aircraft. DNA chain of custody is in question. As is the FDR. It appears you need to do more research on the "witnesses". Start with the pinned topics in the pentagon section.
5. I'm curious as to how "pilots" would be experts in structural engineering or anything directly related to the question of how much damage an aircraft would cause and under what circumstances.
Who is talking about structures here? We are talking about what happened at the pentagon, not the WTC collapse. Pay attention. Specifically the FDR information provided by the US govt which does not support their theory. Did i mention they refuse to comment? Regardless of what you "believe", even if AA77 hit the pentagon, that means the FDR is flawed. If the FDR is flawed, this is a flight safety issue of the highest order. This doesnt seem to bother you too much.. why is that?
Finally, what's "criminal"? I wasn't discussing trials, just the weight of the evidence. However, since you mention it, the Moussaoui trial convicted him of being part of a conspiracy which included the Pentagon incident. Apparently at least one jury was convinced that the evidence went beyond reasonable doubt.
What happened on 9/11 was a criminal act, therefore it needs evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict (unlike weak "preponderance" as you claim). We didnt even have a trial. Our govt sent our boys over to die trying to "smoke him out" without so much as having OBL listed as a suspect for 9/11
due to "No Hard Evidence
" It appears you also need to do more research on the Moussaoui trial instead of once again listening to what Fox News tells you.
Now you will receive your warning for not following Forum Rules. Please review them.