NSA Document Flight 93 intercepted coming soon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gavron said:
If it contains what you think it does, are you going public with it? Have you contacted news sources, television, set up speaking engagements to tell everyone the truth?
Click to expand...

Well we know the main stream media would not print it becasue it contricts what they have stated or been told to state.

I will probably start out with the major 9/11 forums.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Um its 20 days from the time they retreive the requested information.
Click to expand...
Well, if you actually read the letter that you posted on page 1, it states the following:

"We have completed our search for records responsive to your request."

So, they have retrieved the information....and it has been longer than 20 days....24 days so far.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
I will probably start out with the major 9/11 forums.
Click to expand...

So, you will post in only on 9/11 forums. Wow, thats really hitting a big audience there. Are you going to bother telling the victims families? Or only those that possibly read 9/11 forums...

If you dont want to post it on US media, then why not go abroad then? Arrange to have it posted in the UK, or Al Jazeera? They'd love it there.

Why not an anonymous youtube video?

What happened to getting the truth out?:confused:
 
Folks, forgive me for saying this, but this is a tiresome thread. The only thing that matters is the contents of this document, and until that's revealed, anything else regarding it is just blather.

And as I said before, any such claim made in the document must be one that does not contradict the physical and electronic evidence that's already been verified. For example, regardless of claims made by those who've read the document, the FDR indicates a perfectly functional airplane right up to the moment of impact, and the CVR does not indicate any sort of explosive event. So whatever information this document contains, it must either agree with that or provide an explanation to what happened that would result in the FDR and CVR indicating what they did. And unless it sharply contradicts conclusions drawn from a study of either of those, and provides a means for understanding why our current knowledge needs modification, it's not going to change what we know about the events of 9/11. None of the document's contents can be judged through promises made ahead of time or pre-release advertising, it can only be judged on what it actually contains. So, let's wait and see what this document actually says before doing anything else. If Ultima wants to announce what the contents supposedly are ahead of time, let him, but those pronouncements mean just as little as anything else written here.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Folks, forgive me for saying this, but this is a tiresome thread. The only thing that matters is the contents of this document, and until that's revealed, anything else regarding it is just blather.

And as I said before, any such claim made in the document must be one that does not contradict the physical and electronic evidence that's already been verified. For example, regardless of claims made by those who've read the document, the FDR indicates a perfectly functional airplane right up to the moment of impact, and the CVR does not indicate any sort of explosive event. So whatever information this document contains, it must either agree with that or provide an explanation to what happened that would result in the FDR and CVR indicating what they did. And unless it sharply contradicts conclusions drawn from a study of either of those, and provides a means for understanding why our current knowledge needs modification, it's not going to change what we know about the events of 9/11. None of the document's contents can be judged through promises made ahead of time or pre-release advertising, it can only be judged on what it actually contains. So, let's wait and see what this document actually says before doing anything else. If Ultima wants to announce what the contents supposedly are ahead of time, let him, but those pronouncements mean just as little as anything else written here.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think there's a bit more than that. Here's why: ULTIMA1 claims to have already seen a document proving an intercept (and makes some ambiguous claims surrounding a shoot-down). He then claims to have received confirmation that this document actually exists... he's using this FOIA request response as proof of that. This means that when the document arrives and does not state what ULTIMA1 claims, he will simply pretend there's foul play or that they didn't understand his request. It's important to try and confirm that information prior to getting the document in order to really put an end to this. Unfortunately, ULTIMA1 is not interested in actually backing up his claims.

To be honest, there's no way to really confirm what ULTIMA1 claims to have seen, but considering the position and access he claims to hold and yet refuses to verify it's safe to conclude that the entire story is complete rubbish.

Like many other claims coming from this individual, a lack of evidence will be evidence- and I'm sure it will be touted for post after post.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
And as I said before, any such claim made in the document must be one that does not contradict the physical and electronic evidence that's already been verified.
Click to expand...

What physical evidnece has been verified? The FBI and NTSB has not even released thier crime scene reports. And refuses to release some information.


the CVR does not indicate any sort of explosive event.
Click to expand...

Last time i checekd a complete transcript of the CVR has not been released, so how do you know whats not on it?
 
Gavron said:
So others at your home log in as your user ID then on the forums, multiple times a day? How are we to know that the real ULTIMA1 still isnt at work, and that this is actually their pre-teen son playing around? :confused:
Click to expand...


well if that is true, then he and the people who use that computer to log on and post to JREF are in violation of the member agreement here, on sharing accounts.
 
Good detective work, all. I'm leaning towards a junior getting out of hand, but i suppose that's "immature." I never did the research, not my forte. It does also get a bit sqeamish, digging so close to home, but what can one expect after this kind of behavior. Ummm... Mr misner, your son has stolen your car and keeps driving it back and forth across our lawn, claiming to be you, and ummm, we'd like it to stop.

And where is dad anyway? Absentee? (all said in the contect of "if")

But one thing I can add is that he claims to have done other FOIA's, including for the NTSB Flt 77 animation back before I was sure it was legit. He says he got a copy with the letter, but never did share either. At least here he has a scan. [link]

And Ultima1, whoever you are really, to me that's secondary. If you're here to make a big point, please as Horatius asks, give us a clue in advance that identifies the report - it's one set report you saw, right? So tell us it says this, or that, or uses some phrase you remember, or anything as specific as you can.

AND of course share the document once you've found and copied it.

Otherwise you've blown almost your entire chance of redeeming yourself. Please heed this. I'm not being mean but helpful.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
What physical evidnece has been verified? The FBI and NTSB has not even released thier crime scene reports. And refuses to release some information.

Last time i checekd a complete transcript of the CVR has not been released, so how do you know whats not on it?
Click to expand...

An excerpt of the final moments of the Flight 93 was played at the Moussaoui trial. Mike W. of 911 Myths has posted what's publicly available here: http://www.911myths.com/images/a/ae/Flight93.transcript.pdf. It covers the event from 9:34 am (a mere 6 minutes after the hijackings began) all the way to 10:03am (the time of impact), so while it's not "a complete transcript", it covers most of the duration of the hijacking, especially the end of the flight, which would be the segment most important and relevant to those alleging a shootdown. No explosion or mention of a missile was made; that's how I know "whats (sic) not on it".

A portion of physical evidence gathered from the UA93 crash site was presented in the Moussaoui trial, and is also released to the public. When I mentioned evidence in my other post, I was specifically referring to the FDR information and cockpit voice recordings, but other pieces exist. The lack of any information from the FBI and NTSB is a red herring; sources other than those authorities have provided pieces of evidence, such as the CVR and FDR mentioned above, as well as air traffic control radar data, etc. These pieces also exist and provide sufficient information to determine the fate of Flight 93.

But the ultimate point of this thread is about what your document contains, not what is already known and established information. When you receive the info, please post it at your earliest convenience.
 
Last edited:
Caustic Logic said:
But one thing I can add is that he claims to have done other FOIA's, including for the NTSB Flt 77 animation back before I was sure it was legit. He says he got a copy with the letter, but never did share either. At least here he has a scan.
Click to expand...

How many times must i keep showing you guys this stuff before you will accept it?

Here is the letter from the FOIA request for the AA77 FDR.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/911/scanFOIA.jpg?t=1223330807
 
ULTIMA1 said:
Thanks for proving my point about no complete transcript being released.
Click to expand...

Given that the transcript covers the end of the flight which, as I said, is the portion most relevant to those concerned with how Flight 93 went down, I fail to see what highlighting this gains you besides a juvenile "gotcha" point. A point that fades to insignificance when we consider that the portion that was released covered the majority of the hijacking and the actual moments of the flight into the ground itself. And again, no mention was made in the released segment of any explosion or missile, and unless your claim is that a missile was fired at or hit the jet before 9:34 - nearly 30 minutes before the jet actually went down - then the unreleased segment is irrelevant. The section that was released covers the important part of the event.

But, I don't want to allow a derail to get too far out of hand. Again, as I've been saying over and over, the point of this thread is the contents of the document you are attempting to obtain. Until then, any speculation is useless. Again, please be so kind as to post the information as soon as you can after you obtain it. Thank you.
 
ULTIMA1 said:
How many times must i keep showing you guys this stuff before you will accept it?

Here is the letter from the FOIA request for the AA77 FDR.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/phixer6/911/scanFOIA.jpg?t=1223330807
Click to expand...
Took you a long time to get the FDR. But it has not helped your fantasy ideas.

You have working copy of an animation that proves 77 did hit the Pentagon; doubt you understand the FDR.

The flight 93 FDR shows no shoot down and all the witnesses in the area did not see a missile associated with a sonic boom from the supersonic path of the supersonic missile never shot at flight 93 where the terrorist, the very ones you are apologizing for, flew the plane into the ground. The FDR proves the terrorist flew the plane with inputs from their terrorist hands bloody from cutting the pilot's throats, into the ground.

So your junk ideas died before your letter of disappointment comes.

Why do ignore evidence? The impact crater proves no breakup from your silent missile shoot down.
 
Totovader said:
ULTIMA1 - I do have you on ignore, but since you are back here posting, I'm wondering if you can check back on the last page and just confirm or deny that the individuals posting under the same name in different forums (specifically regarding the claim that you are also making being an NSA analyst) are- in fact- you.

In other words, is there anything being posted in your name that you need to refute?
Click to expand...

*bump* for ULTIMA1
 
Gavron said:
I'm curious why ULTIMA1 still tries to debate about flght 83. He did, after all, lose a moderated debate already a couple of months ago on the very subject.

The debate is here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread378018/pg1
Click to expand...

I would have thought in a formal debate, ULTIMA would have at least cleaned up. Starts out the same way and says the exact same things we heard him say countless times.

It was interesting to read, but like the moderator said, it ended up becoming an argument.

I was surprised ULTIMA would even step into the ring at all.
 
Gavron said:
I'm curious why ULTIMA1 still tries to debate about flght 83. He did, after all, lose a moderated debate already a couple of months ago on the very subject.

The debate is here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread378018/pg1
Click to expand...


Thank you so much for posting that link. I had to choke down my supper while reading it. I never saw that on ATS and did not know that some threads there could be so entertaining.

This was my favorite part from ULTIMA1:


I do not accept the following as good sources since their infomration has been debated or debunked.

1. NIST

2. Popular Mecahanics

3. News Media
Click to expand...


Sounds like the kid who yanks up his ball on the playground and runs home.

Everybody should read it.



 
Confirming the identity of ULTIMA1

I have come up with a way that we can at least begin to confirm the identity of ULTIMA1 without getting the authorities involved or calling the phone number of a person who's identity he might have stolen.

I have done some research and made some calls.

I would ask that others join me in pressing ULTIMA1 for answers to the following questions, which- if he is who he says he is- should be easy to answer. Unfortunately, a delay in answering could indicate that he's doing more armchair research- and although this information could possibly be found online, I would be fairly impressed if he went to the trouble and was able to do it that way.

Answering correctly to the following questions does not confirm the identity of ULTIMA1- but it does at least put the question aside for the time being... in my mind.

And, if any of the mods are concerned- the information I will be asking for is public- however I will not post it here, only confirm or deny it once ULTIMA1 answers.

Q1) What is the mascot for your towns high school football team?
Hint: C______

Q2) The post office has several wanted individuals posted up on the wall. What is the name of the individual wanted for Terroristic Threats?
Hint: A_____ H______

Q3) What is the address of the person who lives behind you?
Hint: G____ is w______

Q4) What are their initials?

Q5) What is the address of the person who lives to the right of you?

Q6) What are their initials?

Q7) What are the initials of the woman who resides- or used to reside- at your address?
Hint: Not the previous resident.

Of course, I could just make up answers- so anyone who wants to know the correct answers prior to ULTIMA1 posting them, please let me know so that I have some method of publicly confirming this, and I will PM them to you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom