Posts: 2,690
Threads: 253
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: May 2013
I'm struck by the absurd similarity of arguments by defenders of the official stories of JFK and 9/11. Particularly with regard to the piss-poor pilots of 9/11. Hani Hanjour, who allegedly flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon, performed a high-speed maneuver that professional military/civilian jet pilots regard as virtually impossible.
Yet, apologists will insist that all of the flying that day was easy - they had spent time on simulators! Hanjour wasn't allowed to fly solo in a Cessna, but an airliner at 500 mph was EASY! And the shooting in Dealey Plaza was simple - ANYONE could do it! :  :
Posts: 786
Threads: 104
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Aug 2009
Not only is it very difficult or impossible to fly a 757 in that way, it is also completely useless, risky and unnecessary. It would have been much easier to fly in a direct line into the upper floors of the inner ring than to clip an antenna and several lightpoles, flying low to the ground with high speed, risking premature destruction of the aircraft. You would also have had a better chance to hit Rumsfeld or other important brass. But maybe that was not the purpose.
Analysis of the flight recorder that was found in the Pentagon reveals some other strange behaviour, like that BOTH of the pilots in a time interval of a few seconds adjusted the altimeter to the correct barometric pressure, like professional pilots would do, when passing FL180. For people intending to crash into a building with near perfect visibility this is not a logical thing to do. There are also things that any AA pilot would have done before departure, which were NOT done in AA77, like the alignment of the inertial reference platform.
One possible explanation would be that the flight data recorder found in the Pentagon did not belong to AA77, but to a flight executed by professional military pilots, flying a military aircraft equipped with GPS. How it ended up in the Pentagon is the million dollar question.
The most relevant literature regarding what happened since September 11, 2001 is George Orwell's "1984".
Posts: 17,303
Threads: 3,464
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 2
Joined: Sep 2008
That is what is confusing for me too. Why the big circle around the building? Why not just fly directly at it? It would have served the same purpose and been far easier for an inexperienced pilot. It makes no sense. Too many 'coincidences' that day.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Posts: 2,690
Threads: 253
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: May 2013
Magda Hassan Wrote:That is what is confusing for me too. Why the big circle around the building? Why not just fly directly at it? It would have served the same purpose and been far easier for an inexperienced pilot. It makes no sense. Too many 'coincidences' that day.
Obviously it was intended for one particular part of the Pentagon to be struck (recently reinforced, few personnel inside, minimal damage done). This is one of the things that proves the "made it happen" theory, rather than the "let it happen" theory.
Posts: 901
Threads: 61
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jul 2013
This sums it up quite nicely I think:
[video]https://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98?t=46s[/video]
“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.â€
― Leo Tolstoy,
Posts: 17,303
Threads: 3,464
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 2
Joined: Sep 2008
Tracy Riddle Wrote:Magda Hassan Wrote:That is what is confusing for me too. Why the big circle around the building? Why not just fly directly at it? It would have served the same purpose and been far easier for an inexperienced pilot. It makes no sense. Too many 'coincidences' that day.
Obviously it was intended for one particular part of the Pentagon to be struck (recently reinforced, few personnel inside, minimal damage done). This is one of the things that proves the "made it happen" theory, rather than the "let it happen" theory. Agree 100% with that.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her.
“I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
Posts: 2,131
Threads: 199
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Apr 2014
Not intending to pick a fight here, but it would be a lot easier, especially with a cumbersome big plane, to make a relatively leisurely 315 degree turn while losing altitude that it would be to make a sharp turn and shed enough altitude to strike the Pentagon. Of course, that still begs the question why the plane, if being hijacked by rank amateurs, bothered to turn at all, instead of just boring straight in from the northwest.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
Posts: 9,353
Threads: 1,466
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
R.K. Locke Wrote:This sums it up quite nicely I think:
[video]https://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98?t=46s[/video]
I enjoyed that.
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge. Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Posts: 3,905
Threads: 200
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Sep 2008
David Guyatt Wrote:R.K. Locke Wrote:This sums it up quite nicely I think:
[video]https://youtu.be/yuC_4mGTs98?t=46s[/video]
I enjoyed that.
Perfect for those with little attention span. I just posted it on my fb page.
|
