See other 9/11 Articles
Title: WikiLeaks Reveals Al Qaeda Boss Was Seen at Village Meetings - Despite CIA Claims They Were Clueless
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... den-seen-village-meetings.html
Published: Jul 28, 2010
Author: Mail Foreign Service
Post Date: 2010-07-28 15:17:40 by AGAviator
Keywords: None
Views: 4744
Comments: 280
Glimpses of Bin Laden: Now WikiLeaks reveals Al Qaeda boss was seen at village meetings - despite CIA claims that they were clueless By Mail Foreign Service Last updated at 10:16 AM on 27th July 2010 Bin Laden spotted in meeting with Taliban chief in 2006 'Spotted': Among 91,000 leaked U.S. documents are claims that Osama Bin Laden was last seen in 2006 The claims are among 91,000 U.S. military records obtained by whistleblowing website WikiLeaks. Leon Panetta, director of the CIA, said last month that there have been no firm leads on Bin Laden's whereabouts since the 'early 2000s'. But a 'threat report' from the International Security Assistance Force regional command (north) on suicide bombers in August 2006 suggested Bin Laden had been attending regular meetings in villages on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It said: 'Reportedly a high-level meeting was held where six suicide bombers were given orders for an operation in northern Afghanistan. These meetings take place once every month.' According to the Guardian, which has received the documents, the report went on: 'The top four people in these meetings are Mullah Omar [the Taliban leader], Osama Bin Laden, Mullah Dadullah and Mullah [Baradar].' If true, it could mean forces came close to having the opportunity to wipe out the senior leadership of the Afghan insurgency that has so far claimed the lives of 320 British soldiers. The war logs also show that Bin Laden had a hand in a plot to poison coalition forces by adding a powder to food and drink consumed by troops as they passed through villages. Toll: An Afghan girl in hospital in Helmand after being injured by coalition forces in an air strike in 2007 These documents also suggest coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in so-called 'blue on white' incidents which were never reported. The leak is said to be U.S. Army intelligence expert Bradley Manning, 22, who boasted he had downloaded hundreds of thousands of documents, according to computer hacker Adrian Lamo. The 22-year-old, pictured above, is said to have contacted Lamo out of the blue and then claimed he had saved high-security files onto CDs, ready to hand to Wikileaks, while pretending to listen to Lady Gaga. 'Hillary Clinton and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning and find an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format, to the public,' he apparently told Mr Lamo. The hacker got in touch with the U.S. military and later met with them in Starbucks to hand over a printout of his conversations with Manning. Manning has already been charged over a separate leak of a classified helicopter cockpit video earlier this month. It showed U.S. soldiers laughing as they gunned down Afghan civilians and two journalists in a firefight in Baghdad in 2007. He was picked up in Iraq, where he was working. Manning is said to be locked up in a military prison after being shipped across the border to Kuwait. He faces trial by court martial and, if found guilty, a heavy jail sentence. Mr Lamo believes Manning did not work alone, saying he did not have ‘the technological expertise’ to carry out the gathering and leaking of the documents. 'I believe somebody would have had to have been of assistance to him,’ he said. They include claims that 16 children were among those shot or bombed in error The leaked military logs also reveal how a secret 'black' unit of crack special forces hunt down Taliban leaders for 'kill or capture' without trial - and voice concerns that Pakistani intelligence and Iran are supporting the insurgents. Downing Street said it 'would lament all unauthorised releases of classified material' and the White House condemned the ' irresponsible' leak of the files. And military and intelligence experts warned yesterday that the leaks could imperil the lives of British forces in Afghanistan. Colonel Stuart Tootal, who in 2006 commanded 3rd Battalion Parachute Regiment in Helmand Province - where more than 320 UK soldiers have been killed - said the information 'could impact on the security of our soldiers'. He insisted Nato forces now put a 'huge emphasis' on avoiding civilian casualties. Tory MP Patrick Mercer, a former Army captain, said: 'Although much of this information is in the public domain, the details are particularly damaging to the credibility of the coalition. 'Our enemies will be quick to exploit the propaganda element of it. 'If there are details of operational matters - locations, equipment, troops movements, resources - then soldiers' lives could be placed at risk.' Details of the secret files, detailing military operations between 2004 and 2009, were published yesterday by the Guardian, New York times and Germany's Der Spiegel while more than 75,000 records were made available on the WikiLeaks website. The files list 144 incidents involving Afghan civilian casualties, in which 195 died and 174 were injured. They detail coalition forces - fearful of suicide bombers - shooting unarmed drivers and civilian motorcyclists, and record an incident when French troops opened fire at a bus full of children because it came too close to a military convoy. Other leaked documents record a U.S. patrol machine-gunning a bus, killing or wounding 15 passengers, and Polish troops mortaring a village, killing a wedding party including a pregnant woman. They reveal details of undercover operations by a U.S. special forces unit named task Force 373, formed to hunt down and kill or capture taliban and Al Qaeda commanders. According to Julian Assange, the founder of the website, the files contain details of 'thousands' of potential war crimes. At a press conference in London, he defended his decision to publish the files and claimed the high level of civilian casualties reported was in fact lower than the true figure because military personnel 'downplayed' the number or reported them as insurgent deaths. Mr Assange said: 'We have tried hard to make sure that this material does not put innocents at harm. 'All the material is over seven months old so it is of no current operational consequence, even though it may be of very significant investigative consequence. 'The revelation of abuse by the U.S. and coalition forces may cause Afghans to be upset, and rightly so. ‘If governments don't like populations being upset, they should treat them better, not conceal abuses.' Professor Malcolm Chalmers, a defence expert at the Royal United Services Institute think tank, said that the leaks could undermine already faltering public support for the war. Read more: Bin Laden Seen Village Meetings Poster Comment: There has never been any proof that Bin Laden has died or been killed. He has repeatedly been reported to be in a very rugged area surrounded by people fiercely loyal to him. OBL is not and has never been in direct command of operations. He sees himself as someone providing motivation and logistical support to people actually carrying out day to day operations.
Al Qaeda boss 'had hand' in plot to poison UK troops
Secret files claim British soldiers shot 16 children
Military experts: leaks could put our troops in peril
Taliban missile brought down Chinook helicopter Secret files leaked about the war in Afghanistan have revealed tantalising glimpses of Osama Bin Laden despite public CIA claims that they are clueless as to the whereabouts of the Al Qaeda boss.
IS THIS SOLDIER BEHIND LEAKS? This fresh-faced soldier could be responsible for leaking a massive file of secret military documents revealing chilling details of the Afghanistan war and civilian deaths.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-144) not displayed.
.
.
.
#145. To: abraxas (#104)
Indeed it is. I think aggravator should hie himself off to a site with people on it who would actually enjoy being lied to and given the establishment talking points. I know there has to be a site like that somewhere just chock full of people who like it when someone who couldn't see the truth if it smacked him in the face lied to them all day every day. But he is wasting valuable time by staying here posting to people who ain't buying what he's selling and he needs to get a move on.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. So not only have you been debunked about Hanjour never having any license, you are now debunked about him not having completed type certification for multi- engine jets. Which per FAR's is just as good for type certification on a simulator as getting behind the controls. And a lot less expensive or dangerous both for student and pilot training company. So you have a real airline pilot who expresses my sentiments exactly. So much for "Pilots for 911 truth." You're on a rollllll.... I must have said this at least 100 times. Ground effect, ground effect, ground effect makes the aircraft flown at high speed want to continue flying, not crash. As Williams says "Point the nose down and fly like the devil" to do a crash just AGL. So who the eff is "he" if not Hanjour? And the ATC did not actually say it was not a 757. Just that you "aren't supposed to fly" the 757 the way it was observed flying. So what, so was it a 757 or wasn't it? If if wasn't, where the eff did the "real 757" go which the ATC should have known becuase it was his job as ATC to know where the airplanes were, not how the pilots coulda, shoulda, woulda flown those airplanes. Arm waving with no specifics to rebut
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Well, that doesn't seem to be working out too well for them.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. Uh huh. You neglected to state the source, and the source is the 9/11 Commission Report. You also neglected the analysis of the claims they made. Turning to the footnote for the claim that Hanjour "completed" training at Jet Tech, one can read (emphasis added): "For his training at Pan Am International Flight Academy and completion by March 2001, see FBI report ‘Hijackers Timeline,’ Dec. 5, 2003 (Feb. 8, 2001, entries...)". But turning to that source, the FBI timeline does not state that Hanjour "completed" the training, only that he "ended" the course on March 16.47 The truth is that, as the Washington Post reported, "Hanjour flunked out after a month" at Jet Tech.12 Offering corroboration for that account, the Associated Press similarly reported that "Hanjour did not finish his studies at JetTech and left the school."48 Uh huh. Read the post I just posted, it shows how much of a liar you are.
You again neglected to post the analysis of those claims, and you also neglect all of the evidence indicating the plane did NOT do "loops and turns and spirals", it was in a set of highly controlled and precise descending turns, levelling off at treetop level at 400 mph, and descending to 20 feet of the ground at 530 mph and hitting the 71 foot tall Pentagon wall. So, according to this narrative, Hanjour’s "textbook" "fighter jet maneuver" in a Boeing 757 is evidence that he was a "shitty pilot" and any pilot wannabe with some rudimentary training and maybe just a little bit of luck could have done it. It was easier to hit a target merely 5 stories high at a nearly horizontal angle ("obliquely" as Smith misleadingly claims), than to simply point the nose down to hit a target the size of 22 football fields. These remarks are perhaps not so much the result of an attempt to challenge conventional wisdom as they were simply demonstrative that Smith made very little effort to actually understand the actual nature of Flight 77’s final flight path before writing that it is a "myth" that Hanjour was not a pilot capable of having performed that maneuver. His characterization of Hanjour’s final maneuver as "loops and turns and spirals" indicates that Smith was generalizing without having any real concept of what Flight 77 actually did in its final minutes. A further indication that Smith really just didn’t know what he was talking about was his suggestion that Hanjour "possibly" had "help from the 757’s autopilot" in pulling off those final maneuvers, which is both patently ridiculous and demonstrably false. If the plane didn't do "loops, turns and spirals" it did not do "fighter jet " quality maneuvers. Again, fighter pilots pull 8+ G turns, they have to to avoid SAM's, and a 1/2 G turn isn't even student pilot 30 degree banking maneuver.. Pointing the nose down and diving into the building from above would put most of the energy, momentum and crash force into digging a big hole in the ground, instead of laterally spreading as much damage acoss as many floors as was possible. They knew what they were doing tying to come in from the side.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The further we go the more apparent your dishonest attempts to misrepresent the facts. The full facts of the maneuver is that it was a rapid decrease in altitude of 7,000 feet in 2.5 minutes while making a smooth, precise, 270 degree spiral descent. Again you are trying to make this look like a maneuver any pilot could do easily, and yet professional pilots, and air traffic controllers, described it as a maneuver requiring considerable skill. Something we have well established than Hani Hanjour/Hanjoor was not know for - incredible skill. Rather he was known as an incompetent and was allegedly behind the controls of a Jumbo Jet, something he had NEVER flown, was not trained on, and in fact he had NEVER flown ANY jet aircraft of ANY size, at ANY TIME. In fact the largest aircraft he is ever know to have flown was a twin engine, propeller driven, 4 seat, Piper Apache. So, again it is shown that you are attempting to misrepresent the facts in order to put them in the reach of the known incompetent, as testified to by every instructor he had, Hani Hanjour/Hanjoor.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
You keep blathering about dishonesty while offering no specifics other than your own hot air. You're about to get clouted with some simple basic math, using your own numbers, even you won't be able to contradict. And to think after this simple exercise, which will be impossible for you to debunk, of all the hot air and insults and charges you've spent day after day trying to defend your indefensible theories. And all the attaboys you've received from a handful of people as ignorant as you. Rapid smooth decreases in altitude generate substantial G's. 1/2 G decreases in altitude aren't even student pilot challenges. Now some basic math you can't even be bothered to calculate before posting time after time Half Truther k00kology and its accompanying insults and claims of superior knowledge to people who are trying to talk some sense into you. (1) 7,000 feet/2.5 minutes*minute/60 seconds = 46.667 Feet per Second Vertical Descent Rate (2) 7,000 feet/2.5 minutes/5,280 feet/mile*60 minutes/hour = 31.818 Miles per Hour Vertical Descent Rate (3) 46.667 Feet per Second Vertical Descent Rate*(60*60 Seconds per Hour)/Mile/5,280 feet =31.818 Miles per Hour Vertical Descent Rate. You claim that vertically descending 46.667 Feet per Second, or 31.818 Miles per Hour, is "a maneuver requiring considerable skill." HAHAHAHAA. You go faster downhill on your local roller coaster. Give it up. Once again, you are pwned. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If the plane didn't do "loops, turns and spirals" it did not do "fighter jet " quality maneuvers. First off, it's obvious you're repeating the same "well it didn't fly at Mach 2, perform rolls, spirals", and all the other insane stuff you list. Thing is, WHO SAID THAT HE DID? It's the SPEED the aircraft was flying in the descent, and the sheer precision of the turn that made the air traffic controllers thing it was a military aircraft. Do I have to post those quotes again, for the 50th time or so? Again, fighter pilots pull 8+ G turns, they have to to avoid SAM's, and a 1/2 G turn isn't even student pilot 30 degree banking maneuver.. I get it, you're trying to erase that idea that it COULD have been a fighter jet. Well fighter jets don't HAVE to perform flips and rolls to prove they're a fighter jet, since they ARE fighter jets. Regardless, nobody claimed Hanjour was flying a fighter jet, people remarked that it behaved like a fighter jet.
Per my above post, is descending 46.667 Feet per Second = 31.818 Miles per Hour, vertical speed, for 2.5 minutes, a maneuver requiring "fighter jet" piloting skills or "fighter jet" aircraft speed? Yes or no, please. LOL. Yeah, you do, along with your explanation why you've said "50 times or so" that a 31 MPH vertical descent speed is a "military aircraft" characteristic. And then your explanation for this obsession for posting things that make no sense "50 times or so."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's imbecilic. The airliner could have flown in on an angle, hit the roof, take out a few rings maybe, and splash fuel all over the roof. It would have been the easiest and sure fire way to score a hit. Since Hanjour is alleged to have flown that aircraft, he would have chosen the easiest way, not the hardest possible way there was. The thought of flying a 757 at treetop level at over 400 mph and then dropping down to 20 feet off the ground to hit a 71 tall target at 530 mph, requires suprehuman ability, and there is probably no pilot on earth who could actually do it, not in a 757 at least.
That's what simulators are for. They tell you with considerable accuracy what is possible and not possible, without actually damaging the craft.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- First off, where do you get your values? I didn't see you post a link, so provide your source. Are you claiming that's the fastest it moved through the air in the turns it made? It was flying at a much higher speed than a commercial airliner would be flown at that altitude, and that is why it was travelling at 400 mph when it levelled off at treetop level.
OInk quoted the 7,000 feet in 2.5 minutes vertical descent as evidence of "fighter jet" maneuvering, LOL. It's probably cited on the tapes and ATC research too. At this point I barely care. You guys have been wrong so many times, while claiming to be right, I will need you to prove anything you say, instead of me wasting my time, debunking what you never ever bothered to check out yourselves, before you've schlepped it onto this site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What, are you trying the say the pilots that flew it did it remotely from a simulator? You're not making any sense. If it was a 757, it would have been aerodynmically impossible to fly that low to the ground at over 400mph, so any pilot would have to have been either superhuman, or a computer perhaps. It certainly wasn't Hanjour, who skipped class, did poorly while he was there, and flunked out of 737 simulator training. Besides all that, he couldn't even really even fly a Cessna single engine plane too well either. Hanjour wasn't a super-pilot, that much is indisputable.
Ground effect generates extra lift. Even a flaps down, nose up, power trimmed, and gear extended passenger jet going 150 mph instead of 450 mph needs thrust reversers in most cases to keep from going off a 10,000 foot runway. The simulator knows that. If the simulators are wrong about any important facts, they would not be FAA certified for training, and the sellers of the programs and devices would have been sued years ago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I'm saying a simulator will tell you the possibility or impossiblity of flying barely above the earth with gear up and at high speed. And Hanjour had access to simulators, whether he actually practiced or did not practice this maneuver. Nope. He was discouraged from continuing, but he "persevered" and eventually completed it. That link is already posted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are you smoking something other than tobacco? Ground effect generates extra life, that is true. That is why it'd be practically impossible for a 757 to fly that low to the ground at that speed, ground effect would prevent it from going any lower. A pilot would have to try to fight ground effect with the nose down. However, since the was aircraft was accelerating from 400 mph to 530 mph, the faster the aircraft flew, the more lift would have been created since ground effect increases with speed, so that is where the impossible part comes into the picture. There'd be no way to counter the increasing ground effect at that speed, the plane would have wanted to climb, and there would have been no way to descend with the nose level at that speed from 60 feet high to 20 feet high while accelerating.
The 9/11 Commission made that claim. The FBI witness reports do not say he "completed it successfully". He dropped out, and did not successfully complete the school. That is documented fact. It is documented fact that he frequently skipped school, didn't do his homework, and could not really understand what he was being taught.
Try it on a simulator, keeping in mind that clipping 5-6 light standards, rocking the wings on final approach, and brushing a wing against construction equipment are evidence of a plane not under complete control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa. An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001 911 Truth states Hanjour finished 737 Simulator in March 2001, and its source is footnoted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post a link. Possibly they just copied what the 9/11 Commission stated, which is not the truth. I doubt they stated that was the final word on it.
Why don't you. I doubt you've ever been in either a commercial airliner simulator or a real airliner cockpit. You can blow smoke all you want, any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60 feet off the ground in a 757 at over 400 mph and maintain that altitude for any distance, ESPECIALLY if accelerating. Well no shit Sherlock the aircraft allegedly hit light poles (even though there are reports it didn't, but that's another story concerning what REALLY hit the Pentagon). The light poles were between the Pentagon and the approach the aircraft allegedly took. What'd you think, you can fly lower than the top of the light poles and not touch them somehow, sort of like Magick Lightpoles or something? As far as wobbling, you haven't provided ANY evidence of that. And again, Hanjour would had to have been a superhuman pilot to fly as low as he allegedly did and as fast as he allegedly did, keeping that plane from climbing while travelling at over 400 mph so close to the ground, all while accelerating to 530 mph. He most certainly wouldn't have been able to descend to 20 feet off the ground. The guy couldn't even fly a Cessna 172.
Magic(k)al Light Poles™ and Magic(k)al Jet Fuel™. D@mn, is there no end to the tricks they will play on us?!?!
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. If you don't know what the word means, I'll be glad to explain it to you. We'll starrt with the correct pronounciation. Pree...ko....shush.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
No they will not. Prove it Who hit the light poles I have. There are also plenty of pictures of the tops of construction equipment being hit by the starboard wing, and eye witness testimony. Wrong. Ground effect keeps the plane from crashing into the ground unless the nose is pointed sharply downwards. Wrong. A competent ATP with 38 years experience has already been quoted, on this thread, saying "Point the nose down and fly like the devil" to do exactly that. BAHAHAHAHAHA!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- And don't forget the Magic(k)al Wings, where the wings vaporized into nothing, and must have contained a different blend of Magic(k)al Jet Fuel that instead of causing the Pentagon to collapse, it simply vanished into THIN AIR ALONG WITH THE WINGS! Of course, we can't forget the Magic(k)al Pentagon Windows which either allow jet aircraft wings to pass though them without breaking the glass, or were so durable the wings and fuel crashed into them at 530 mph and BOUNCED OFF before they VANISHED.
You: No they will not. Well possibily not those pilots who have never actually flown a large heavy aircraft with relatively low wing-loading (such as a commercial jet), or those in training who haven't studied anything about aerodynamics yet, but pretty much any honest commericial airline pilot will tell you that it is practically impossible.
I know what the word means, hence the questions: You precocious? I think you have confused premature development with arrested development. : )
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
Of course, we can't forget the Magic(k)al Pentagon Windows which either allow jet aircraft wings to pass though them without breaking the glass, or were so durable the wings and fuel crashed into them at 530 mph and BOUNCED OFF before they VANISHED. Oh, the unmitigated HORROR of all the Magic(k)! It is scary to think about it.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. Peons -- especially little troll peons -- are not allowed to insult Turtle! I order you to pound your forehead against the floor until forgiven.
"A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools." - Douglas Adams
You: Prove it Well it'd be sort of hard to talk to every pilot in the world now wouldn't it. But first let's correct your obviously poor job of cutting and pasting. You forgot to finish the sentence I had posted, and either willfully or negligently infer that I said an aircraft can't fly below 60 feet. OF COURSE aircraft fly lower 60 feet when they land, but they DON'T land at 530 mph, they land at about 150 mph. This is what I ACTUALLY said, which conveys a different meaning than what you cut from my original comment; "any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60 feet off the ground in a 757 at over 400 mph and maintain that altitude for any distance, ESPECIALLY if accelerating." Here's what Nila Sagadevan, an aeronautical engineer and a qualified pilot of heavy aircraft, had to say about the matter. From The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a 200,000-lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH. The author, a pilot and aeronautical engineer, challenges any pilot in the world to do so in any large high-speed aircraft that has a relatively low wing- loading (such as a commercial jet). I.e., to fly the craft at 400 MPH, 20 feet above ground in a flat trajectory over a distance of one mile. Why the stipulation of 20 feet and a mile? There were several street light poles located up to a mile away from the Pentagon that were snapped-off by the incoming aircraft; this suggests a low, flat trajectory during the final pre- impact approach phase. Further, it is known that the craft impacted the Pentagon's ground floor. For purposes of reference: If a 757 were placed on the ground on its engine nacelles (I.e., gear retracted as in flight profile), its nose would be almost 20 above the ground! Ergo, for the aircraft to impact the ground floor of the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to have flown in with the engines buried 10-feet deep in the Pentagon lawn. Some pilot. At any rate, why is such ultra-low-level flight aerodynamically impossible? Because the reactive force of the hugely powerful downwash sheet, coupled with the compressibility effects of the tip vortices, simply will not allow the aircraft to get any lower to the ground than approximately one half the distance of its wingspan - until speed is drastically reduced, which, of course, is what happens during normal landings. In other words, if this were a Boeing 757 as reported, the plane could not have been flown below about 60 feet above ground at 400 MPH. (Such a maneuver is entirely within the performance envelope of aircraft with high wing-loadings, such as ground-attack fighters, the B1-B bomber, and Cruise missiles - and the Global Hawk.) You: Who hit the light poles Do you really need to ask? The official story alleges that Hanjour flew a 757 down to ground level at 530 mph, where the wings clipped the light poles since they were in the way. So which is it, do you wish to debate using the "facts" alleged by the official story, or do you wish to look at eyewitness testimony which states that immediately after Flight 77 allegedly impacted the Pentagon, those poles were NOT downed? All of it is irrelevant in regards to Hanjour's alleged skills, since the only way to have hit the Pentagon as it is alleged WOULD be to knock down those light poles. In reality, the wings would have been torn to shreds or at least sprung a massive leak if they had impacted light poles at 530 mph. Yet, there is NO external fire visible in the videos taken soon after the aircraft is alleged to have impacted. Where'd the fuel go? If those wings hit the poles they'd be torn and spewing fuel everywhere.
You: I have. There are also plenty of pictures of the tops of construction equipment being hit by the starboard wing, and eye witness testimony. You've made many unsubstantiated claims, but I don't recall you ever posting any sort of proof in terms of eyewitness testimony stating that. Could you post a link? Oh, and the construction equipment was obviously in the way as well, so what'd you expect, THEY would be MAGICKAL as well, and would allow the wings and/or engines to pass through them? That's the thing, with all of these alleged collisions, the fuel would have sprayed everywhere, yet didn't. As far as the wings wobbling, the only thing wobbling is you. Any sort of wobble at that speed would have caused the aircraft to veer to the left or to the right, resulting in the need for more exaggerated counter moves to keep the plane from crashing, which WOULD have made it crash. Of course, if it WASN'T a 757, something like a drone or a fighter painted LIKE a AA 757, well then THAT might have wobbled a bit as it was seeking the perfect heading for the plan to work.
You: Wrong. Ground effect keeps the plane from crashing into the ground unless the nose is pointed sharply downwards. Planes don't fall out of the sky although there IS no ground effect above a certain altitude, which would be roughly 60 feet for a 757 according to the source I've provided. Are you trying to say that planes rely on ground effect to stay airborne? Ground effect provides ADDED lift, and is a function of proximity to the ground and air speed. The closer the aircraft is to the ground, the greater the ground effect. However, there is minimal ground effect at landing speed. Ground effect becomes excessive at 400 mph however, and effectively prevents the plane from going any lower. The way to descend is to slow down, yet the alleged Flight 77 SPED UP, causing ground effect to INCREASE. The plane would have been trying to climb, and it would have taken massive effort to prevent it from doing so. It certainly couldn't have DROPPED ALTITUDE, coming within 20 feet of the ground, all while keeping the nose LEVEL, yet THAT is how the aircraft entered the Pentagon if the observed damage was in fact the result of the impact. It would have either created a large gash in the lawn leading up to the wall and not penetrated the building as deeply if the nose had been down, or it would have struck higher up the wall with a level nose since the increased ground effect would have caused it to climb. So then, it more than likely WASN'T a 757.
You: A competent ATP with 38 years experience has already been quoted, on this thread, saying "Point the nose down and fly like the devil" to do exactly that. I'd like to see him do it in a 757 flying over 400 mph 20 feet from the ground for a distance identical to that of the alleged 757. He could prove it once and for all if it were possible. Of course, there is NEVER any deliberate disinformation presented by "experts", right? You're trying to sell the idea that a guy who basically crapped his pants in a Cessna 172 single engine airplane, one who couldn't even fly a circle around the airport and had trouble descending with it for a proper landing, flew a multi-engine jumbo jet (without EVER having flown ANY sort of jet before in his life) at 20 feet off the ground travelling at 530 mph. Yeah, he "flew like the devil", that's a great scientific analysis your pal presented. He couldn't fly a paper airplane, never mind a Boeing 757 at unheard of speeds so close to the ground.
You: Oh really? How do airplanes ever land then? BAHAHAHAHAHA! Don't you tire of misrepresenting what I've said? You know damn well I didn't claim aircraft never drop to 20 feet. The part you left out is as follows; Since you are apparently VERY unfamiliar with English, let me say it again... There is no possible way on earth Hani Hanjour could have flown a Boeing 757 at 20 feet off the ground, WHILE ACCELERATING TO 530 MPH. In fact, Hani Hanjour more than likely wouldn't have been able to fly a CESSNA 172 at IT'S top speed so close to the ground without crashing it, since he was such a lousy "pilot", one who was basically incompetent at anything related to flying an aircraft. I have not followed this thread so I must say I don't know what side of the 911 story related to Hani Hanjour either of you represent...moving along to why I am posting to the thread, I thought both of you might get a kick out of reading MSM's description of Hani Hanjour ( spoon fed to them by the FBI) - it's pretty funnny, and even more so considering that at the time we Amerikens ( myself being one of the dumb bunnies) slurped down this stinky poopy crapola like it were sweet tasting syrup... Enjoy! www.washingtonpost.com/wp...ics/attack/hijackers.html Hani Hanjour Obtained a commercial pilot's license in April 1999 from the Federal Aviation Administration. [ how easy peasy was that?]The license expired six months later because he failed to complete a required medical exam.[ oops - he forgot to do the one single requirement] In 1996, he received flight training for a few months at a private school in Scottsdale, Ariz., but did not finish the course because his instructors thought he was not proficient enough.[ but the FDA thought he was great no questions asked except for needing a physical exam ] He listed his address as a post office box in Taife, Saudi Arabia,[ red flag, red flag - are PO boxes even exist in SA?] but he also has been linked to addresses in San Diego and Hollywood, Fla. His name was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket. [ say what????? he just waltzed on the plane 'cause he was a Big Cheese???]
That's what simulators are for. They replicate the entire performance envelope of the craft including risky maneuvers that could cause the plane to crash in real life. But of course you don't want to concede simulators are useful and valid, because that will undermine your claim that Hanjour's completed 737 training prepared him to fly a multi engine 757. Anonymous self taught internet rubes are far more likely disinformation purveyors than known ATP's with publicly documented 38 year service records and a stack of endorsed log books with tens of thousands of hours of piloting time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- There is not much disagreement on whether Hanjour was a crummy pilot. The contention comes from the CT's saying he absolutely had to be a great pilot in order to pull a 1/2 G turn, when just to get a pilot license you need to pull a 2G 360 degree turn + or - 200 feet. And the CT's saying he absolutely had to be a great pilot in order to descend at 46.667 feet per second or 31.818 MPH vertically over the time span of 2 minutes. I say "ridiculous" to both claims of the need for piloting to be excellent to perform at these simple levels. It's the classic strawman argument. Put up something untrue ("fighter pilot level skills needed to fly the 757"), rebut it, then claim victory.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments (186 - 280) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThe best we can do is encourage this line of thinking, James. : )
Lord Acton
OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
#146. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo (#138)
(Edited)
The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa. An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.
Airline pilot Patrick Smith, writing for Salon, said that it was one of "the more commonly heard myths that pertain to the airplanes and their pilots" that "the terrorist pilots lacked the skill and training to fly jetliners into their targets. This is an extremely popular topic with respect to American 77. Skyjacker Hani Hanjour, a notoriously untalented flier who never piloted anything larger than a four- seater, seemed to pull off a remarkable series of aerobatic maneuvers before slamming into the Pentagon." Smith’s answer to this was simply to flip conventional wisdom on its head. He opined that "If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation’s capital revealed him to be exactly the shitty pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with the help from the 757’s autopilot. Striking a stationary object – even a large one like the Pentagon – at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon’s lawn." Hanjour had all the skill that was required, Smith suggested, adding "You can learn it at home.
Similarly quoted was George Williams, a pilot for Northwest Airlines for 38 years, who said, "I don’t see any merit to those arguments [that Hanjour couldn’t have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon]. The Pentagon is a pretty big target and I’d say hitting it was a fairly easy thing to do."58 It’s true that the Pentagon was a very big target.
But Williams was apparently similarly aware, when he was asked to comment, of the plane’s final descending maneuver; or of the fact that this maneuver put the plane on a path that reduced the margin to a mere 26.5 feet (a few feet lower, the plane crashes into the ground; a few feet higher, the plane overshoots the target.
An air traffic controller from Dulles International Airport told ABC News, "The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane. You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."
Whatever the case, many questions about the events of 9/11 remain to this day unanswered, despite the appointment of the 9/11 Commission ostensibly to investigate and provide answers to those questions. And whichever the case, the conclusion is inescapable that the 9/11 Commission deliberately attempted to deceive the public about the piloting capabilities of Hani Hanjour.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#147. To: IRTorqued (#144)
it is worse because they have chosen to be willfully blind they wish all were as blind.
Lord Acton
OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
#148. To: AGAviator (#146)
The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa. An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#149. To: AGAviator (#146)
So not only have you been debunked about Hanjour never having any license, you are now debunked about him not having completed type certification for multi- engine jets. Which per FAR's is just as good for type certification on a simulator as getting behind the controls. And a lot less expensive or dangerous both for student and pilot training company.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#150. To: AGAviator (#146)
Airline pilot Patrick Smith, writing for Salon, said that it was one of "the more commonly heard myths that pertain to the airplanes and their pilots" that "the terrorist pilots lacked the skill and training to fly jetliners into their targets. This is an extremely popular topic with respect to American 77. Skyjacker Hani Hanjour, a notoriously untalented flier who never piloted anything larger than a four- seater, seemed to pull off a remarkable series of aerobatic maneuvers before slamming into the Pentagon." Smith’s answer to this was simply to flip conventional wisdom on its head. He opined that "If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation’s capital revealed him to be exactly the shitty pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with the help from the 757’s autopilot. Striking a stationary object – even a large one like the Pentagon – at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon’s lawn." Hanjour had all the skill that was required, Smith suggested, adding "You can learn it at home.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#151. To: FormerLurker (#150)
you also neglect all of the evidence indicating the plane did NOT do "loops and turns and spirals", it was in a set of highly controlled and precise descending turns, levelling off at treetop level at 400 mph, and descending to 20 feet of the ground at 530 mph and hitting the 71 foot tall Pentagon wall.
It was easier to hit a target merely 5 stories high at a nearly horizontal angle ("obliquely" as Smith misleadingly claims), than to simply point the nose down to hit a target the size of 22 football fields
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#152. To: AGAviator, FormerLurker, all (#151)
Again, fighter pilots pull 8+ G turns, they have to to avoid SAM's, and a 1/2 G turn isn't even student pilot 30 degree banking maneuver..
#153. To: OInk, buckeroo, turtle, FormerLurker, AKA Stone (#152)
(Edited)
The further we go the more apparent your dishonest attempts to misrepresent the facts.
The full facts of the maneuver is that it was a rapid decrease in altitude of 7,000 feet in 2.5 minutes while making a smooth, precise, 270 degree spiral descent.
So here you are. Again you are trying to make this look like a maneuver any pilot could do easily, and yet professional pilots, and air traffic controllers, described it as a maneuver requiring considerable skill.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#154. To: AGAviator (#151)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#155. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo (#154)
(Edited)
Regardless, nobody claimed Hanjour was flying a fighter jet, people remarked that it behaved like a fighter jet
Thing is, WHO SAID THAT HE DID? It's the SPEED the aircraft was flying in the descent, and the sheer precision of the turn that made the air traffic controllers thing it was a military aircraft.
Do I have to post those quotes again, for the 50th time or so?
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#156. To: AGAviator (#151)
Pointing the nose down and diving into the building from above would put most of the energy, momentum and crash force into digging a big hole in the ground, instead of laterally spreading as much damage acoss as many floors as was possible. They knew what they were doing tying to come in from the side.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#157. To: FormerLurker (#156)
There is probably no pilot on earth who could actually do it, not in a 757 at least.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#158. To: AGAviator (#155)
Per my above post, is descending 46.667 Feet per Second = 31.818 Miles per Hour, vertical speed, for 2.5 minutes, a maneuver "fighter jet" piloting skills or "fighter jet" aircraft speed?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#159. To: FormerLurker (#158)
(Edited)
First off, where do you get your values? I didn't see you post a link, so provide your source.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#160. To: AGAviator (#157)
That's what simulators are for. They tell you with considerable accuracy what is possible and not possible, without actually damaging the craft.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#161. To: FormerLurker (#160)
If it was a 757, it would have been aerodynmically impossible to fly that low to the ground at over 400mph
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#162. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo, turtle (#160)
(Edited)
What, are you trying the say the pilots that flew it did it remotely from a simulator? You're not making any sense
Hanjour...flunked out of 737 simulator training.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#163. To: AGAviator (#161)
(Edited)
Ground effect generates extra lift. Even a flaps down, nose up, power trimmed, and gear extended passenger jet going 150 mph instead of 450 mph needs thrust reversers in most cases to keep from going off a 10,000 foot runway.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#164. To: AGAviator (#162)
He was discouraged from continuing, but he "persisted" and eventually completed it.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#165. To: FormerLurker (#163)
(Edited)
There'd be no way to counter the increasing ground effect at that speed, the plane would have wanted to climb
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#166. To: FormerLurker (#164)
Post #138
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#167. To: AGAviator (#166)
911 Truth states Hanjour finished 737 Simulator in March 2001, and its source is footnoted.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#168. To: AGAviator (#165)
Try it on a simulator, keeping in mind that clipping 5-6 light standards, rocking the wings on final approach, and brushing a wing against construction equipment are evidence of a plane not under complete control.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#169. To: FormerLurker (#168)
Magick Lightpoles
Lord Acton
OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
#170. To: abraxas (#114)
lol.........You precocious?
#171. To: FormerLurker (#168)
Any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60 feet off the ground in a 757 at over 400 mph and maintain that altitude for any distance, ESPECIALLY if accelerating.
Any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60
What'd you think, you can fly lower than the top of the light poles and not touch them somehow?
As far as wobbling, you haven't provided ANY evidence of that.
And again, Hanjour would had to have been a superhuman pilot to fly as low as he allegedly did
Keeping that plane from climbing while travelling at over 400 mph so close to the ground, all while accelerating to 530 mph.
He most certainly wouldn't have been able to descend to 20 feet off the ground.
Oh really? How do airplanes ever land then?
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#172. To: James Deffenbach (#169)
Magic(k)al Light Poles™ and Magic(k)al Jet Fuel™. D@mn, is there no end to the tricks they will play on us?!?!
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#173. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: Any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60 feet off the ground in a 757 at over 400 mph and maintain that altitude for any distance, ESPECIALLY if accelerating.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#174. To: Turtle (#170)
#175. To: FormerLurker (#172)
And don't forget the Magic(k)al Wings, where the wings vaporized into nothing, and must have contained a different blend of Magic(k)al Jet Fuel that instead of causing the Pentagon to collapse, it simply vanished into THIN AIR ALONG WITH THE WINGS!
Lord Acton
OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
#176. To: abraxas (#174)
I think you have confused premature development with arrested development. : )
#177. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: Any pilot and any aeronautical engineer will state it's virtually impossible to fly less than 60
I shan’t get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown whole semi-trucks off the roads.)
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#178. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: What'd you think, you can fly lower than the top of the light poles and not touch them somehow?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#179. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: As far as wobbling, you haven't provided ANY evidence of that.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#180. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: And again, Hanjour would had to have been a superhuman pilot to fly as low as he allegedly did
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#181. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: Keeping that plane from climbing while travelling at over 400 mph so close to the ground, all while accelerating to 530 mph. Wrong.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#182. To: AGAviator (#171)
Me: He most certainly wouldn't have been able to descend to 20 feet off the ground.
"As far as wobbling, you haven't provided ANY evidence of that. And again, Hanjour would had to have been a superhuman pilot to fly as low as he allegedly did and as fast as he allegedly did, keeping that plane from climbing while travelling at over 400 mph so close to the ground, all while accelerating to 530 mph. "
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#183. To: FormerLurker, AGAviator (#181)
#184. To: FormerLurker, buckeroo, turtle (#181)
(Edited)
I'd like to see him do it in a 757 flying over 400 mph 20 feet from the ground for a distance identical to that of the alleged 757. He could prove it once and for all if it were possible.
Of course, there is NEVER any deliberate disinformation presented by "experts", right?
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
#185. To: scrapper2, buckeroo, turtle (#183)
(Edited)
I thought both of you might get a kick out of reading MSM's description of Hani Hanjour ( spoon fed to them by the FBI) - it's pretty funnny, and even more so considering that at the time we Amerikens ( myself being one of the dumb bunnies) slurped down this stinky poopy crapola like it were sweet tasting syrup.
One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work....Noam Chomsky
.
.
.