I want Warren Stutt do declare himself regarding his relation to the ARINC file.http://www.911woodybox.blogspot.com/2012/0...t-re-arinc.html
on your website you have created a special ACARS page, introducing a list of ACARS messages as transmitted through the ARINC data system. You claim that it was obtained via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).http://www.warrenstutt.com/ACARSMessages/index.html
As an independent researcher, I welcome your efforts to unveil official documents which might be helpful in answering some of the most urging questions of the official 9/11 story. However, I have some objections regarding the ARINC logs as presented by you. I miss date and number of the FOIA request, and the person who initiated it. Also, I miss a header in the document itself - no reference number, no date, no names which would guarantee authenticity.
There are additional questions regarding the content of the document. Examples: Why are the ACARS data for United 175 missing? Why do the data suggest that United 93 never was in the Cleveland area? And there are more questions begging for an answer.
This being said, I don't want to say that the ARINC logs are completely faked and useless for historical research. Just to the contrary, they match the already known ACARS documents (which I have published here in former blog entrys) in big parts and clarify existing ambiguities. But they create new ambiguities as well.
Intending to make use of the ARINC logs, I'm encountering the dilemma that potential insights are standing on a shaky base and subjected to the sword of Damocles which is called "manipulation". In coming blog entries and articles I will therefore refer to the ARINC logs as "Stutt ARINC logs" to emphasize that their authenticity has not been verified yet. I also will add a disclaimer that my findings are subjected to the insecure authenticity of the document. i.e that I take an "as if" approach: as if the logs were authentic.
I ask you to support my efforts to validate the authenticity of the file by publishing number, date, and inquirer of the document on your ACARS page if possible. If this is not possible, I ask you to publish the reason why not. I also would appreciate a personal assessment of the file's authenticity by you, right on your ACARS page. Do you trust it personally, and are you ready to retract it if its authenticity is thrown into doubt by new developments?
With kind regards,