See other 9/11 Articles
Title: 9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE (FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT)
Source:
pilotsfor911truth.org
URL Source: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/american_77_hijack_impossible.html
Published: Nov 27, 2009
Author: unk
Post Date: 2009-11-27 21:43:30 by rack42
Keywords: 911, pentagon, flight 77
Views: 2110
Comments: 118
(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act. On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3] Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow. == [3] Right click and save target as here to download csv file with "FLT DECK DOOR" parameter.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: rack42 (#0)
No need to read further.
So, how should I interpret that statement? And why don't you say what you mean? [edit] And why not make plain what you mean.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
"Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence " Opening statement is self explanatory.
Opening statement is self explanatory. So, here we go again. You base your opinion on what? Is an "independent researcher and computer programmer" from Australia somehow deficient in determining that the program used by the glowber warmers is a fraud? And, no, the opening statement is only self-explanatory to you.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Opinion???? Show me where I stated an opinion. You posted something about a "researcher" and a "programmer", no names, no credentials, nothing, there fore, no need to read any further.
Know what, you got your responces crossed (as did I). This thread is about flight 77.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Nope. Didnt bother to read any further.
Well, thanks for not bothering to look at the data. It would have confounded you and who knows what you would have said then. Jeez.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Recorder info: two files, one "original," one showing just Door data http://www.warrenstutt.com/AAL77FDRDecoder/OutputFiles/FinalFlightComplete.csv http://www.megaupload.com/?d=XX44XLUH caveat: door data updated every 4 seconds so if Hani Hanjour got really lucky he could get into the cockpit without the data recorder noting the opening of the door.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Go away loser.
God is always good!
Be glad to read anything bearing the names and credential of people that would be given credibility by those of known expertise in any such manner.
And you are qualified in what manner to decide this????
Didn't I tell you to go away? Why are you still here? Enough, you are bozoed loser.
God is always good!
Only those afflicted with a sense of inferiority are so inclined.
Just bozo the .gov loser so we can discuss this damning evidence against the damn Jews who did 9/11.
God is always good!
What I would like to know is what took them so long to form such an organization? I know the Scholars for 9/11 truth are disinfo artists working for the damn Jews, so I am highly suspect of this group too. You don't ever here much about the nation and people that benefited the most form 9/11. NOOOO, that is kept under the rug while fingers are pointed at Bush, the brainless wonder, and his side kick Cheney. No more evidence is needed really to conclude 9/11 was a Mossad/CIA operation. The CIA doesn't work for the USA, nope, they work for the owners of the Federal Reserve, mostly the damn Jews. The real question is... I think you know.
God is always good!
Yes. Correct.
Here is the webpage of the Aussie programmer: http://www.warrenstutt.com/AAL77FDRDecoder/index.html His name is Warren Stutt. The webpage contains links to the binary and source of the program that he used to make it convienent to review the data of the flight recorder of AA77. Here is the data of AA77 from NTSB: http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf Note that the file is from the NTSB website.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Most interesting post on http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php? showtopic=18405 by a poster named Rob Balsamo. Some things to chew on for skeptics. And we should all be skeptical whatever our orientation in regard to this topic. I took a stroll around the net to see the excuses made by a select few who blindy follow anything the govt tells them. I'll address them here for now. Claim - How can anyone trust data from some anonymous guy in Australia? A. We agree, but he is not really anonymous. He does give his name, but we werent able to ask him if he wanted his name used in the article. That is why we cross checked it with our own data we received from the NTSB. You can also get your own directly from the NTSB as we did. Visit ntsb.gov and fill out their FOIA request form online. Claim - Does the cockpit door show open for the pilots to get in? A. No, it shows closed for entire flight. The FDR starts recording when the engines are started. Clearly the pilots would be in their seats and cabin/flight deck secure during this phase of flight. Claim - Does the FDR record if the door is open or closed? A. Clearly it does. It says closed for the entire flight and was confirmed by the Data Frame Layout provided by the NTSB and a pilot who has flight time in this exact 757 at American Airlines. Claim - The sensor must have failed. A. Speculation, but if the sensor failed, it would "ding" the FDR that a sensor has failed during self-diagnosis. If the FDR is inoperative, the airplane is not allowed to take-off. The sensor was operative. People who make this claim, would also have to prove the sensor fails in the closed position. Claim - The hijackers kicked in the door and jammed the sensor in the closed position. A. Again, pure speculation based on incredulity. But the fact remains, the data shows the door as closed, the altitude too high to hit the Pentagon, Vertical speed too great for level off as seen in DoD 5 frames video, the list goes on. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment on such blatant conflict with the govt story. Claim - The bird strike which took out the Flight Data Recorder prior to impact also took out the door sensor 30 mins prior to impact. A. Not really a claim made by "duhbunkers" at this point in time, but give it a few days. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)
There is something I would like to make quite clear. My personal beliefs... AT THE VERY LEAST, some members of the government were aware prior to 9/11. This means that no matter what is discussed, I ACCEPT THAT "GOVERNMENT WAS INVOLVED.... Whomever the person was that originated the first idea, we will never know. From the opposite view, it is beyond ludicrous when any attempt or discussion tries to weave into this web, hundreds of people far and wide, that were somehow complicit in carrying out 9/11. Do I believe the government??? Of course not. But after all these years it is time we focused our efforts on finding the ...ORIGINATORS OF 9/11 AND THEIR FEW MINIONS THAT CARRIED IT OUT... Whomever they were and are, they surely are laughing at the endless arguments of totally meaningless ideas.
The very reason I refuse to take part in discussions that are nothing more than a waste of time.
The person that conceived this foul deed did not get his hands dirty in any way. Then he enlisted a very tight and small group to "manage" the operation. At that point anyone else added to the operation was merely a drone that knew ONLY his own little part, nothing more.
My observations agree with your's in totality.
I would imagine that each one was convinced that they were doing "God's Work". Lot of that going around.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" The person that conceived this foul deed did not get his hands dirty in any way. In an operation of this scale, that probably goes without saying. Then he enlisted a very tight and small group to "manage" the operation. At that point anyone else added to the operation was merely a drone that knew ONLY his own little part, nothing more. When the government releases the tapes from the boarding gates monitoring access to the flights in question, I will continue to question who the "drones" were and whom they were working for.
randge... No drone will EVER lead us up the ladder. Consigning countless people as "conspirators" will never unravel this thing.
No drone will EVER lead us up the ladder. Consigning countless people as "conspirators" will never unravel this thing. So what's wrong with a thread that speculates?
well articulated, Cyni
i don't think there's anything wrong with it. i enjoy speculating/conversation on a number of topics, but i can see where others may think it's a waste of their time. we will never know what really happened on 9/11 just as with the kennedy assassination. both government tales are ludricous.
I agree. I consider these sites like the benches outside the old small town grocery stores or barbershops where the old timers used to meet to discuss the issues of the day. Not a lot got settled but life is just a learning process anyway.
Tom... Possible but unlikely. There was a great deal of sloppiness involved in 9/11, all by the lower drones, pilots, that were to carry out the act. They were flying flags in this country that screamed for attention. Of the lot, only one was caught before the deed and the FBI had to be coaxed into acting on that one. That does not make the FBI co-conspirators.
Both events defy logic and demand that the viewer put aside all standards of normalcy and common sense in order to believe them. The fact that they came out with explanations immediately following the events said volumes. In eras without the one hour criminal TV dramas we ALL would have immediately been suspicious. Well it does attest to the inability of government bureacrats to create scenarios that MAKE SENSE with a logical time line.
This one is worth rereading. Prevost lives locally and has never spoken of the affair, to anyone. http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/01/24/moussaoui.reward/index.html
There was a great deal of sloppiness involved in 9/11, all by the lower drones, pilots, that were to carry out the act. They were flying flags in this country that screamed for attention. Of the lot, only one was caught before the deed and the FBI had to be coaxed into acting on that one. Six of the purported "drones" that were said to have piloted those planes are still alive. (Note that the networks have long ceased posting the pictures of the "nineteen hijackers" in their reports. Why?) I am far from convinced that the Arabs said to have flown those planes were indeed on them at all. That does not make the FBI co-conspirators. You can call them what you like, Cyni, but they and their alphabet-soup agency brethren are withholding a massive amount of evidence concerning what went on that day based on "national security." I doesn't wash in my book. Those that cover the tracks are as culpable as the perps.
And some of us will NEVER forget.
Let me see if I get the reasoning right. That the data was read and decoded by an independent researcher makes it unworthy of notice" No one not in the government, or under a government contract, is a credible researcher - particularly independent researchers? Therefore there is no possibility that the data could be correct? Makes sense to me. The source of the data does not agree with my prejudices so throw it out without any further examination or cross checking. After all we all know that 911 was perpetrated my "19ARABSWHOHATEUSCUZWE'REFREE" directed by a madman with his magic cell phone hidden in a secret cave in Tora Bora. You know - the super sophisticated one that was in the Snoozeweak piece on Osama Ben Forgotten's high tech Deathstar Fortress. Can we say conclusion without examination? Sure we can. Wasn't that easy?
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
You can call them what you like, Cyni, I was referencing the local FBI and Zacarias Moussaoui. The drones were advertising they were up to something to anyone that was paying attention. Prevost saw it early on and the FBI paid no attention. " Prevost testified that he approached his managers, and recalled telling them, "We don't know anything about this guy, and we're teaching him how to throw the switches on a 747." Don't Miss * FindLaw: Moussaoui's case history But he said his managers at first told him Moussaoui had paid his money and they didn't care. Prevost testified that he told his bosses, "We'll care when there's a hijacking and the lawsuits come in." He testified Moussaoui's stated goal of learning to fly from Heathrow Airport in London to New York's John F. Kennedy Airport was unusual from the beginning, because Moussaoui had 50-odd hours of flight time on a single-engine propeller plane and no pilot's license. Prevost testified he usually had students with more than 600 hours of flight time, and that they are usually professional pilots looking to upgrade their skills and fly bigger jets for a higher salary. But Moussaoui, he testified, "had no frame of reference whatsoever with a commercial airliner. After 15 minutes I said, 'Let's get lunch.' " Prevost said he was worried that if Moussaoui completed the three four-hour 747 simulator sessions he had booked, he would know how to operate a real 747. He testified that he let Moussaoui sit in on another student's simulator session, but he never got any of his own sessions. A day after Prevost went to his bosses with his concerns, two Pan Am program managers called the FBI, leading to Moussaoui's arrest on an immigration violation. Moussaoui had stayed in the United States past his allowed 90 days on his French passport. In November, the Air Line Pilots Association, International, presented Prevost with its 2007 Presidential Citation Award for his efforts to alert authorities to Moussaoui, according to an ALPA "
Conclusion without examination is what the narratives are written for. Gleiwitz. The Reichstag. The Gulf of Tonkin. Remember the Maine. Those that do not learn from history . . . you all know the rest of that well worn aphorism.
Comments (41 - 118) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestNewly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes
#2. To: Cynicom (#1)
(Edited)
No need to read further.
#3. To: rack42 (#2)
So, how should I interpret that statement?
#4. To: Cynicom (#3)
"Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence "
#5. To: rack42 (#4)
You base your opinion on what?
#6. To: Cynicom (#5)
#7. To: rack42 (#6)
#8. To: Cynicom (#7)
Nope. Didnt bother to read any further.
#9. To: All (#8)
#10. To: Cynicom (#1)
#11. To: rack42 (#8)
Well, thanks for not bothering to look at the data.
#12. To: RickyJ (#10)
Go away loser.
#13. To: Cynicom (#12)
#14. To: RickyJ (#13)
Enough, you are bozoed loser.
#15. To: rack42 (#0)
#16. To: rack42 (#0)
Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth
#17. To: RickyJ, all (#15)
Just bozo the .gov loser so we can discuss this damning evidence against the damn Jews who did 9/11.
#18. To: rack42, *9-11* (#0)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#19. To: Cynicom (#11)
#20. To: rack42, Cynicom, RickyJ, All (#8)
Wow, this article is going viral. Over 1000 people logged onto this thread alone at this time. We're setting records today.
#21. To: rack42, randge (#19)
#22. To: Cynicom (#21)
Do I believe the government??? Of course not. But after all these years it is time we focused our efforts on finding the ...ORIGINATORS OF 9/11 AND THEIR FEW MINIONS THAT CARRIED IT OUT...
#23. To: Phant2000 (#22)
The very reason I refuse to take part in discussions that are nothing more than a waste of time.
#24. To: Cynicom (#23)
#25. To: Cynicom (#23)
(Edited)
At that point anyone else added to the operation was merely a drone that knew ONLY his own little part, nothing more.
#26. To: Cynicom (#23)
#27. To: randge (#26)
When the government releases the tapes from the boarding gates monitoring access to the flights in question, I will continue to question who the "drones" were and whom they were working for
#28. To: Cynicom (#27)
randge...
#29. To: Cynicom (#21)
#30. To: mininggold (#28)
#31. To: christine (#30)
i don't think there's anything wrong with it. i enjoy speculating/conversation on a number of topics, but i can see where others may think it's a waste of their time. we will never know what really happened on 9/11 just as with the kennedy assassination. both government tales are ludricous.
#32. To: tom007 (#25)
I would imagine that each one was convinced that they were doing "God's Work".
#33. To: christine (#30)
but i can see where others may think it's a waste of their time. we will never know what really happened on 9/11 just as with the kennedy assassination. both government tales are ludricous.
#34. To: mininggold, christine, randge, All (#33)
#35. To: rack42 (#0)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#36. To: Cynicom (#32)
#37. To: christine (#30)
we will never know
#38. To: Cynicom, rack42 (#3)
"Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence "
#39. To: randge (#36)
That does not make the FBI co-conspirators.
#40. To: Original_Intent (#38)
After all we all know that 911 was perpetrated my "19ARABSWHOHATEUSCUZWE'REFREE" directed by a madman with his magic cell phone hidden in a secret cave in Tora Bora. You know - the super sophisticated one that was in the Snoozeweak piece on Osama Ben Forgotten's high tech Deathstar Fortress.
.
.
.