• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

no serial numbers were identified from flight 77

ULTIMA1 said:
IT WAS OFF RADAR.

Do you understand that? Thats does not mean it was not what hit the Pentagon, just that it was not tracked all the way as most people state.
Click to expand...

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! But, it's not worth the effort to post the information again.
 
Reheat said:
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! But, it's not worth the effort to post the information again.
Click to expand...


I will post my facts again, and have more if you need.

http://www.historycommons.org/entity...rfriendly=true
An air traffic controller at the FAA’s Indianapolis Center, which was monitoring Flight 77 when it disappeared from radar (see 8:56 a.m. September 11, 2001 and (8:56 a.m.-9:05 a.m.) September 11, 2001),

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...rticleId=10158
At 8:50 its transponder signal was turned off and moments later it disappeared from radar at the Ohio-West Virginia line.
 
Pardalis said:
hmmmm, what I have in mind would be against the membership agreement, so I'll have to respectfully decline to answer. :D
Click to expand...

But that brings me back to the question that bothers me most about this forum. How do you focus on the argument if the argument is totally irrational, a symptom of a pathology? When is it appropriate to conclude something about the arguer?
 
ULTIMA1's version of what http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=indianapolis_flight_control says:

"An air traffic controller at the FAA's Indianapolis Center, which was monitoring Flight 77 when it disappeared from radar (see 8:56 a.m. September 11, 2001 and (8:56 a.m.-9:05 a.m.) September 11, 2001)".

What that source really says:

8:56 a.m. September 11, 2001: Flight 77’s Transponder Signal Disappears, yet NEADS Is Not Alerted

Flight 77’s transponder is turned off, meaning that the aircraft’s speed, altitude, and flight information are no longer visible on radar displays at the FAA’s Indianapolis Center. (Federal Aviation Administration 9/17/2001 pdf file; National Transportation Safety Board 2/19/2002 pdf file; 9/11 Commission 7/24/2004, pp. 9) The Indianapolis Center air traffic controller in charge of Flight 77 watched the plane go off course and head southwest before its data disappeared from his radar screen. He looks for primary radar signals along the aircraft’s projected flight path as well as in the airspace where it had started to turn, but cannot find it. (9/11 Commission 6/17/2004)
Click to expand...
 
ULTIMA1 said:
I will post my facts again, and have more if you need.

http://www.historycommons.org/entity...rfriendly=true
An air traffic controller at the FAA’s Indianapolis Center, which was monitoring Flight 77 when it disappeared from radar (see 8:56 a.m. September 11, 2001 and (8:56 a.m.-9:05 a.m.) September 11, 2001),

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...rticleId=10158
At 8:50 its transponder signal was turned off and moments later it disappeared from radar at the Ohio-West Virginia line.
Click to expand...

If you weren't so STOOPID, you'd realize that you're posting references WHAT THE CONTROLLER COULD SEE versus mine which ARE DOCUMENTED AFTER THE FACT.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
FineWine said:
But that brings me back to the question that bothers me most about this forum. How do you focus on the argument if the argument is totally irrational, a symptom of a pathology? When is it appropriate to conclude something about the arguer?
Click to expand...

Isn't it Jonathan Swift who said :"It is impossible to reason someone out of something that he did not reason himself into in the first place."
 
Pardalis said:
Isn't it Jonathan Swift who said :"It is impossible to reason someone out of something that he did not reason himself into in the first place."
Click to expand...

I have loved that quote since I first encountered it. I wish I'd remember it when I attempt the impossible here.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
That means that ATC DID NOT track AA77 the whole way.
Click to expand...


Didn't you read what Reheat just wrote???? LOL

Real-time tracking of a plane that had its transponder data disappear (yes, that is what those articles are talking about) is altogether different from tracing the path of the plane from the raw data after the fact.

Let's say you are a super-seekret agent man (CIA or FBI field agent) watching a suspect walk his way through a crowded shopping mall. He ducks down a moment and dang, he's gone! You can't pick him out from the mass of people walking hither and thither. You try to look at where he walking towards, but he's not anywhere to be found. Real-time tracking....a failure. But you go upstairs to the security station and review the CCTV cameras scattered throughout the crowded mall. You rewind the tapes and then watch him from second to second from camera to camera, and you succeed in figuring out where he ended up going. You successfully retraced his steps, even though he got away. But since you didn't track him real time, do you seriously believe that he could have vanished for real into thin air and a replacement doppelganger look-alike substituted in his place? ULTIMA1 thinks it's a "reasonable" possibility. Even tho he can watch the video tapes second by second and see for himself that no such thing ever happened.
 
Last edited:
FineWine said:
Tell us in your own words what Reheat is trying to say.
Click to expand...

He is trying to state that the transponder signal was lost from the screen when actually the plane went off the RADAR also as shown in several sources..
 
Last edited:
ULTIMA1 said:
He is trying to state that the transponder signal was lost from the screen when actually the plane went off the RADAR as shown in several sources..
Click to expand...

Do you even have a functioning brain? Are you a bot? Are you dead or alive, yet with no functioning brain?
 
ULTIMA1 said:
He is trying to state that the transponder signal was lost from the screen when actually the plane went off the RADAR also as shown in several sources..
Click to expand...

WHAT sources?! Certainly not any that you have presented. Those talk about the TRANSPONDER SIGNAL being lost from the screen, as any dolt with a shred of honesty can see for himself.
 
Reheat said:
Do you even have a functioning brain? Are you a bot? Are you dead or alive, yet with no functioning brain?
Click to expand...

Mangoose said:
WHAT sources?! Certainly not any that you have presented. Those talk about the TRANSPONDER SIGNAL being lost from the screen, as any dolt with a shred of honesty can see for himself.
Click to expand...


As stated the transponder data was lost from the screen and then the plane disappeared from RADAR.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...rticleId=10158
At 8:50 its transponder signal was turned off and moments later it disappeared from radar at the Ohio-West Virginia line.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=indianapolis_flight_control&printerfriendly=true
An air traffic controller at the FAA’s Indianapolis Center, which was monitoring Flight 77 when it disappeared from radar (see 8:56 a.m. September 11, 2001 and (8:56 a.m.-9:05 a.m.) September 11, 2001),

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MAZ20080911&articleId=10158
At 8:50 its transponder signal was turned off and moments later it disappeared from radar at the Ohio-West Virginia line.
Click to expand...

But it was still on RADAR and you can't understand it~! You are not an NSA analyst; this single statement proves it when you read the whole thread. But you are in a pathological delusion where you can't comprehend facts and evidence to make a coherent statement. But other than that you are doing 10 to 20 posts a half hour of pure stupid on the analyzing side.

wow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom