NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[oody]

excerpt from some person on flickr: (but no photo of the stone)

A Zero Line at the entrance to the memorial park is a gray stone border set in the ground and inscribed with "September 11, 2001 9:37 a.m." The gray stone was cut from the Pentagon's limestone walls damaged in the attack.

 

[ozeco41]

Yes, the moral gravity of being put under oath is the one thing that foils most perpetrators and abettors of mass murder. Brilliant thinking, oh friend of the truth.

They don't score many marks for being realistic.

I have never comprehended why the call for investigation includes "subpoena power' and "evidence under oath". Picture the scene:

"Mr Bin Laden, thank you for attending this inquiry. Did you endorse the actions of 9/11"

...all that apart from the obvious problem of tying their strategy to deliberate lies.

If you want a political move to look at Government involvement in 9/11 and the associated accountability issues why for gawds sake tie your worthy political objective to the dead set loser of a dishonest claim for demolition at WTC.

All that does is feed every politician involved with an easy escape route.

Political naivety IMO

 

[TruthersLie]

Showing up to see what is going on is standard operating procedure, has been for decades.

I'm not talking about shooting, I'm talking about finding out what's going on.

The entire "10 minute jet intercepts" and the "80+ aircraft intercepts" has been debunked long ago.

After pointing this out to you, you even acknowledged your own ignorance. Have you bothered to LOOK up this claim? yes or no?

<facepalm>

 

[TruthersLie]

Who knows? That's a very good question to be asked at an inquiry.

Or another question, where did the parts go to? Big parts, such as those big engines.

Wowsers Dwain.

Just a simple question for you, since you worked at nasa and all.

Do you mean to tell me those rocket thingies are all one massive part? That they are all cast from the same mold and are not made up of many smaller parts?

Cuz, see, an aircraft engine is like those rocket thingees. (for this extremely simplified analogy) They are made up of hundreds/thousands of smaller parts and when they go boom, or come apart, they don't stay in one intact piece.

There are dozens of (if not hundreds) of images which show parts of the aircraft, parts of the engines, and parts of people. Maybe you missed them... or are you claiming the engines were cast from one piece and should have completely and utterly held together?

 

[DGM]

I just found this pic of the stone: http://twitpic.com/qfe8e

ETA: someone's twitter pic labelled "Pentagon Memorial show the time 9:37"

Thanks. Now that I see what they're talking about , I do remember that. I'll have to see if my sister can go by there this week and take a look.

 

[beachnut]

... , where did the parts go to? Big parts, such as those big engines.

The engine was smashed into parts, here is a large engine part from Flight 77. Why are do you make up and spread false information? This is what an engine looks like in a kinetic energy impact with a building at 488 knots. If CIT and Balsamo could do physics they would understand 911; one could dream, hope, etc...

I investigated aircraft accidents and was trained in things like this, maybe your lack of training and knowledge on aircraft kinetic energy impacts is keeping you from understanding 911 aircraft impacts.

... , where did the parts go to? Big parts, such as those big engines.

Did you try to look for them?

 

[pgimeno]

1. The FDR and RADAR records are in conflict with each other.

You've shown no valid evidence for this. They match quite correctly, including the left turn you allude to. You can check by watching this video while you still can (Google Video is closing):

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6529691284366443405

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

The left turn starts at about minute 38. It's the one during which the transponder was turned off.

2. Witnesses attest to seeing airplane on an approach path to the Pentagon that is inconsistent with the physical damage path.

And others claiming that the plane downed light poles, consistently with the physical damage path. At worst, what we would have here is a contradiction of eyewitness accounts, something quite expectable in any event. The physical damage can be used to discern who is right though.

3. Evidence inside the Pentagon (stopped clocks, etc.) correspond to an explosive event approximately 6 minutes before the official time attributed to an airplane impact.

That evidence also corresponds to an earthquake at that time. Why aren't you claiming there was an earthquake instead of an explosive event?

Oh, and incidentally it also corresponds to a plane crashing into the building.

4. No reporting of evidence has occurred that would tie any airplane parts in the debris to any particular airplane.

Now if you really want to get those parts identified, you can go and file a FOIA request with the relevant authorities to ask for the identification of them. Unless your objective is actually NOT to find the truth, that is. However, in that case it will make your case much more feeble, since the burden of proof is on you to prove your claims, you know.

5. Failure of air defenses to respond to an obvious inflight emergency (complete loss of contact with AA77 by Indianapolis ATC approximately 40 minutes prior to events at Pentagon).

That has nothing to do with the identification of AA77 at all. Why are you including that among your reasons to question AA77?

Have you attempted to find out when the air defenses were notified about AA77? Obviously not. You'll be surprised.

When witnesses and physical evidence conflict, open an inquiry and start asking questions. Be sure to put people under oath.

(points at sig)

Anyway, what we have here is many reports matching physical evidence, and a few reports which conflict with those and which were taken years after the event. It's a no-brainer to me.