NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

[ULTIMA1]

How about the ones of us who are smart enough, mature enough, ?

Well you are not smart enough or mature enough or you would have figured out i am who i say i am. Please try again

 

[JimBenArm]

Well you are not smart enough or mature enough or you would have figured out i am who i say i am. Please try again

I have figured it out. From post #1 in this thread.

If you were who you said, you would not have had to file a FOI request to see the document.

If you were who you said, you would have pulled this document already, taken it to the press, and spread it everywhere.

You haven't done this, therefore you are not who you claim you are. Unless you are a craven coward, as well.

You're not, are you?

 

[lapman]

Please do some research befor posting about something its clear you know nothing about.




Why are you lying? Anytime a crash is considered a crims the FBI and NTSB must investigate, please read the regualtions governing crash sites that are considered a crime.

Wrong. Your own link proved you to be wrong.

The structure of NTSB investigations is not suited to criminal investigations.

and

Simultaneous with the FBI's criminal investigation, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), exercising its authority and responsibility under the law to investigate civil aviation accident investigations, conducted and continues to carry out a massive, thorough and exhaustive examination to identify a non-criminal cause for the flight 800tragedy. It is our understanding that the results of the NTSB's accident investigation, to date, will be presented at the public hearing in Baltimore. The FBI is the primary criminal investigative agency of the government and decisions regarding the presence or lack of evidence of criminal activity are committed to and made by the FBI and the Department of Justice. I do not believe it is appropriate for the NTSB, and agency whose jurisdiction is to conduct aviation accident investigations and which has no criminal investigative jurisdiction, to examine the particulars of and to present the results of the criminal investigation at a public hearing, particularly when there is a possibility, albeit remote, that the criminal investigation could be reactivated based on new information.

Therefore, you are the liar.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

<snip>
http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
<snip>.

Did you read this part of the NSA security manual?:

Perhaps one of the first security practices with which new NSA personnel should become acquainted is the practice of anonymity. In an open society such as ours, this practice is necessary because information which is generally available to the public is available also to hostile intelligence. Therefore, the Agency mission is best accomplished apart from public attention. Basically, anonymity means that NSA personnel are encouraged not to draw attention to themselves nor to their association with this Agency.

(bolding mine)

 

[beachnut]

Here is what the NSA expert says...

The NTSB has to investigate and do reports on all aircraft crashes if its a crime or not. ...

Here is what the NTSB experts say...

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket.

The NTSB says it does not have to do reports. The NTSB statement was directly from flight 93 information posted by the NTSB.

One of the first woo things I heard about 911 was there was no NTSB investigation. I quickly respond to those talking to me, "the NTSB does not do aircraft crashes that are crimes", they pick up their stuff and hand it to the police and go home. U1 is repeating the standard failed tripe of party members in 911Truth.

How is this related to 911 understanding?

U1 reads a Critic that state Flight 93 was shot down.

... "Critic" that i asked for that states that Flight 93 was intercepted. ...

In addition to being shot down 93 was intercepted. It makes sense now.

Soon the interception and shoot down paper on Flight 93.

Will it be like his interpretation of the NTSB role in crime?

 

[ULTIMA1]

If you were who you said, you would not have had to file a FOI request to see the document.

Well if you could read you would known that i did file an public FOIA request to show it on this forum.

If you were who you said, you would have pulled this document already, taken it to the press, and spread it everywhere.

Again of you could read my FOIA request is for a declassified copy, since i cannot post a classified copy to anyone.

You're not, are you?

Thanks for proving again that you cannot figure out i am who i say i am.

 

[ULTIMA1]

Did you read this part of the NSA security manual?:

Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.

 

[ULTIMA1]

Here is what the NSA expert says...
Here is what the NTSB experts say...
The NTSB says it does not have to do reports. The NTSB statement was directly from flight 93 information posted by the NTSB.

Just becasue the NTSB stated it was not going to make a public reports does not mean they still do not have to do one.

"the NTSB does not do aircraft crashes that are crimes", they pick up their stuff and hand it to the police and go home.

Thanks for admitting the NTSB is involved (as the law states) with crime scenes along with the FBI.

Will it be like his interpretation of the NTSB role in crime?

Seems to me like its you that needs to read the federal requlations on the NTSB so you might know what goes on.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Thanks for shoiwng that you completely avioded the facts and that i have proven my point.

I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

How about responding to my question? Aren't you violating NSA security practices by advertising your NSA affiliation on the Internet?

 

[beachnut]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance.

This funny; you go a rent a spook web site and lifted the abbreviated security clearance on a badge to be your TS/SI which means what?

It means you just proved you are just a fake digging up junk from the Internet. You have googled your way to be a NSA analysts using the identity of a gate guard who works at the NSA.

You can't talk about classified, you cant talk your way around classified, and you can't post that you read a classified message and say anything about it. If you really worked at the NSA you would loose your job. You even posted a phone number where the name you use answers the phone but never calls back.

You posted a wannabe spy organization web site. You should never show us where you lifted the ideas behind your made up identity.

You just proves you have no clearance and no clue what clearance you would have; you lifted it from this web site or you see it on peoples badges when you work the gate as a guard. I am a real analyst; a SAC trained killer.

 

[ULTIMA1]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance

 

[ULTIMA1]

It means you just proved you are just a fake digging up junk from the Internet. You have googled your way to be a NSA analysts using the identity of a gate guard who works at the NSA.

No it means that i have proven to people like you who cannot get on a secure net that i have that there is a TS/SI clearence.

You posted a wannabe spy organization web site. You should never show us where you lifted the ideas behind your made up identity.

So how many sites and what kind of sites can i post before you can be mature enough to admit i have proven my point? But we know that you and others on here can never be that mature don't we?

 

[beachnut]

Sorry but i have to prove that there is a TS/SI clearence. I only hope you will be rational and sane enough to admit i have shown that there is a TS/SI clearence.

http://www.tscm.com/NSAsecmanual1.html
NSA Badges

Blue: Employees who are cleared to the SECRET level while awaiting completion of their processing for full (TS/SI) clearance

Yes you see the badges when you work the gate. The TS/SI is what you found on the web.

When is the report coming, and the NTSB does not investigate crime.

You work at the NSA, go on over and check it out; what is taking so long? Are they in your building?

 

[JimBenArm]

Well if you could read you would known that i did file an public FOIA request to show it on this forum.

Yes, I know you filed one. Now, if you were who you said, you would have walked down the hall, pulled the file, and posted it everywhere. At least that's what someone who is not a coward would do. Are you really that concerned about your stupid job that you wouldn't risk it to bring someone evil enough to do these things to justice? Or is it that you don't really have that job? I know which one it is, and so does everyone else, except you.

Again of you could read my FOIA request is for a declassified copy, since i cannot post a classified copy to anyone.

And a declassified copy is going to be what? Anything incriminating? Yeah. Sure it is. Just like you're an NSA analyst.

Thanks for proving again that you cannot figure out i am who i say i am.

Don't hate me because I'm beautiful. Hate me because I have you completely figured out.

 

[ULTIMA1]

I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

Well at least one person on here can admit to something.

How about responding to my question? Aren't you violating NSA security practices by advertising your NSA affiliation on the Internet?

No, not really since i have not disclosed anything.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I don't recall challenging your point, but you have shown TS/SI on the website. Happy now?

Well at least one person on here can admit to something.

Yipee! Does that mean I'm "mature"?

No, not really since i have not disclosed anything.

It doesn't say you have to disclose anything. It says:

Basically, anonymity means that NSA personnel are encouraged not to draw attention to themselves nor to their association with this Agency.

 

[ULTIMA1]

Yes, I know you filed one. Now, if you were who you said, you would have walked down the hall, pulled the file, and posted it everywhere.

You do know that the Critc is clasified right ? That means i cannot post it to anyone.

And a declassified copy is going to be what? Anything incriminating?

Yes, enough to prove my point about the official story, and to hopefully get a real investigation into 9/11 going.

 

[ULTIMA1]

It doesn't say you have to disclose anything. It says:

But just stating i work there is not like if you dislcose something.

It states "personnel are encouraged not to draw attention" it does not state you must not.

 

[lapman]

Just becasue the NTSB stated it was not going to make a public reports does not mean they still do not have to do one.

That's false. There is nothing that is stated anywhere that they were required.

Thanks for admitting the NTSB is involved (as the law states) with crime scenes along with the FBI.

False. The law does not stated that they had to do any type of investigation into 9/11. They did it at the request of the FBI. That is clearly stated.

Seems to me like its you that needs to read the federal requlations on the NTSB so you might know what goes on.

I did. There is nothing in them that states that they have to investigate a crash where the cause is known.
Section 831.4

Accident and incident investigations are conducted by the Board to
determine the facts, conditions, and circumstances relating to an
accident or incident and the probable cause(s) thereof. These results
are then used to ascertain measures that would best tend to prevent
similar accidents or incidents in the future.

Since the crashes were caused by a crime, there is nothing for the NTSB to investigate that it could create recommendations to prevent them in the future. There is NOTHING in the law that requires them to investigate crashes caused specifically by a criminal act.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

But just stating i work there is not like if you dislcose something.

It states "personnel are encouraged not to draw attention" it does not state you must not.

Forget it. Apparently you have a reading comprehension problem.