how the FBI and 9/11 Com suppressed key evidence

[mhgaffney]

How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour, alleged hijack pilot of AAL 77

by
Mark H Gaffney

The evidence was crucial because it undermined the official explanation that Hani Hanjour crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon at high speed after executing an extremely difficult top gun maneuver. But to understand how all of this played out, let us review the case in bite-size pieces...

In August 2004 when the 9/11 Commission completed its official investigation of the September 11, 2001 attack, the commission transfered custody of its voluminous records to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).[1] There, the records remained under lock and key for four and a half years, until last January when NARA released a fraction of the total for public viewing. Each day, more of the released files are scanned and posted on the Internet, making them readily accessible. Although most of the newly-released documents are of little interest, the files I will discuss in this article contain important new information.

As we know, the 9/11 Commission did not begin its work until 2003–––more than a year after the fact. By this time a number of journalists had already done independent research and published articles about various facets of 9/11. Some of this work was of excellent quality. The Washington Post, for example, interviewed aviation experts who stated that the plane allegedly piloted by Hani Hanjour [AA Flight 77] had been flown “with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm.”[2] Yet, strangely, when other journalists investigated Hani Hanjour they found a trail of clues indicating he was a novice pilot, wholly incapable of executing a top gun maneuver and a successful suicide attack in a Boeing 757. By early 2003 this independent research was a matter of public record, which created a serious problem for the 9/11 Commission...

for the full article go to
http://www.the911mysteryplane.com/

[Rohirrim]

I think it was a suicidal ex-Mossad fighter pilot at the helm. Or maybe it was robotically controlled from deep inside NORAD? I mean, they've got those Predator drones. Wouldn't it be a simple thing to hook up a passenger jet? Then, they just take over the controls and the pilot can't do anything about it!

[Dukes]

You almost convinced me this time

[gyldenlove]

This argument seems to be based on an assumption that the plane hit what they were aiming at. Considering that the plane hit the ground and the building at more or less the same time and that they hit a part of the building that was empty, I would say they missed. The Pentagon is approximately 1500 feet from one side to the other, including the possibility of hitting the ground, that makes the target nearly 2000 feet big and sticking out of the ground.

I don't see how that is a topgun maneuver.

[The Lone Bolt]

This argument seems to be based on an assumption that the plane hit what they were aiming at. Considering that the plane hit the ground and the building at more or less the same time and that they hit a part of the building that was empty, I would say they missed. The Pentagon is approximately 1500 feet from one side to the other, including the possibility of hitting the ground, that makes the target nearly 2000 feet big and sticking out of the ground.

I don't see how that is a topgun maneuver.

Because some unidentified "experts" said so of course. ::)

[cutthemdown]

Ok I just did it with flight simulator. I missed the first time but hit right on top of it the second time. Crashing a plane not as tough as you think Gaff. It's landing them safely that is tough.

[mhgaffney]

Cut,

There's a world of difference between your computer simulator program or whatever -- and a Boeing 737 flight simulator. Big difference.

We have the written evaluation by Hanjour's flight instructor -- that the FBI and 9/11 Commission buried because it conflicted with the official story.

A guy who flops in a Boeing 737 simulator would have zero chance to fly a Boeing 757 -- which is a much larger and less maneuverable aircraft.

I gave all of the links in my notes. But as usual you are too lazy to do an ounce of research. Get a clue.

MHG

[mhgaffney]

Here's a photo of a Cessna 172. It's a one engine job. They don't come any simpler or easier to fly.

Yet Hanjour flunked a flight evaluation test in this plane -- just a few weeks before 9/11.

I spoke with the flight instructors at Freeway AP, including Ben Conner who rode with Hanjour. He confirmed that Hanjour flunked because of general ineptitude. This was reported by Newsday -- a story that the 9/11 Com ignored. I wonder why.

[W*GS]

Not this **** again.

[TDmvp]

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/796/51d4tvrqvtlss500.jpg

[The Lone Bolt]

ZZZ... ZZZ... ZZZ...

... Salon's "Ask the Pilot" also commented on the issue:

As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the ****ty pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.

It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."

That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon.
http://www.salon.com/tech/col/smith/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/


Experienced pilot Giulio Bernacchia agrees:

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Flight_School_Dropouts

[mhgaffney]

I have cited official documents -- including the evaluations of flight instructors who knew Hanjour and flew with him -- and you pick someone off the street --- and cite his opinion.

Just goes to show - your opinion is garbage.

[mhgaffney]

Curious that the pilot cited by Lone Bolt would not give his last name.

But it's no wonder -- since any pilot who would say "their skills or lack of - just weren't relevant" discredits himself by his own words.

So this is no real person -- but more manufactured evidence -- just like the testimony of Eddie Shalev.

[The Lone Bolt]

I have cited official documents -- including the evaluations of flight instructors who knew Hanjour and flew with him -- and you pick someone off the street --- and cite his opinion.

Just goes to show - your opinion is garbage.

Did any of your sources both state clearly and prove conclusively that it would have been impossible for Hanjour to fly a Boeing 757 into the Pentagon?

[SoCalBronco]

http://img190.imageshack.us/img190/796/51d4tvrqvtlss500.jpg

Buy my book.

[mhgaffney]

Here is the statement by Philip Marshall, a Boeing pilot presently licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s.

This is taken verbatim from his 2008 book FALSE FLAG 911

Marshall: “Hitting a 90-foot target [i.e., the Pentagon] with a 757 at 500 mph is extremely difficult -- absolutely impossible for first-time fliers of a heavy airliner. It’s like seeing Tiger Woods hit a 300-yard one-iron and someone telling you he never practiced the shot.”

Marshall theorizes in his book that the alleged hijackers received advanced training by Arab speaking pilots at a secret base in Arizona or Nevada -- over a period of months -- possibly arranged by complicit Saudi diplomats or even by members of the Saudi royal family.

But the fact Hanjour flunked a simple flight test in a one engine Cessna just weeks before 9/11 demolishes this theory - which otherwise might be plausible.

[orinjkrush]

I'm more impressed that he did a 360 looking for the Capitol before he slammed the Puzzle Palace.

[The Lone Bolt]

Here is the statement by Philip Marshall, a Boeing pilot presently licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s.

This is taken verbatim from his 2008 book FALSE FLAG 911

Marshall: “Hitting a 90-foot target [i.e., the Pentagon] with a 757 at 500 mph is extremely difficult -- absolutely impossible for first-time fliers of a heavy airliner. It’s like seeing Tiger Woods hit a 300-yard one-iron and someone telling you he never practiced the shot.”

Marshall theorizes in his book that the alleged hijackers received advanced training by Arab speaking pilots at a secret base in Arizona or Nevada -- over a period of months -- possibly arranged by complicit Saudi diplomats or even by members of the Saudi royal family.

But the fact Hanjour flunked a simple flight test in a one engine Cessna just weeks before 9/11 demolishes this theory - which otherwise might be plausible.

And how does Marshall prove conclusively that it's impossible? Isn't this a matter of his opinion and not objective fact?

And how does Hanjour flunking one flight test (I'll take your word that he did) prove that he didn't have the specific skills to fly a jetliner into the Pentagon weeks later? Flunking a flight test could mean he was lacking in areas not directly relevant to his mission on 9-11.

Even if it did, he had weeks to study and compensate, so you're still proving nothing.

[mhgaffney]

Weeks to study...? Are you kidding me?

The guy couldn't even remember his own pin number.

[Hotrod]

Weeks to study...? Are you kidding me?

The guy couldn't even remember his own pin number.

Hey Gaffo any news on the area 51 cover up???

[gyldenlove]

Here is the statement by Philip Marshall, a Boeing pilot presently licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s.

This is taken verbatim from his 2008 book FALSE FLAG 911

Marshall: “Hitting a 90-foot target [i.e., the Pentagon] with a 757 at 500 mph is extremely difficult -- absolutely impossible for first-time fliers of a heavy airliner. It’s like seeing Tiger Woods hit a 300-yard one-iron and someone telling you he never practiced the shot.”

Marshall theorizes in his book that the alleged hijackers received advanced training by Arab speaking pilots at a secret base in Arizona or Nevada -- over a period of months -- possibly arranged by complicit Saudi diplomats or even by members of the Saudi royal family.

But the fact Hanjour flunked a simple flight test in a one engine Cessna just weeks before 9/11 demolishes this theory - which otherwise might be plausible.

Ask that guy how hard it is to hit a 2000 foot target, which is what the pentagon is.

That is the equivalent of seeing me hit a badly sliced 200 yard one-iron into the deep rough and someone telling you I don't carry a 1-iron when I play normaly.

[Rohirrim]

Here is the statement by Philip Marshall, a Boeing pilot presently licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s.

This is taken verbatim from his 2008 book FALSE FLAG 911

Marshall: “Hitting a 90-foot target [i.e., the Pentagon] with a 757 at 500 mph is extremely difficult -- absolutely impossible for first-time fliers of a heavy airliner. It’s like seeing Tiger Woods hit a 300-yard one-iron and someone telling you he never practiced the shot.”

Marshall theorizes in his book that the alleged hijackers received advanced training by Arab speaking pilots at a secret base in Arizona or Nevada -- over a period of months -- possibly arranged by complicit Saudi diplomats or even by members of the Saudi royal family.

But the fact Hanjour flunked a simple flight test in a one engine Cessna just weeks before 9/11 demolishes this theory - which otherwise might be plausible.

That brightens up my day. Keep it coming, Gaff. :rofl:

[The Lone Bolt]

Weeks to study...? Are you kidding me?

The guy couldn't even remember his own pin number.

How does failing to remember one number (again taking your word for it) prove that he was unable to study and retain the necessary information (over a matter of weeks) to execute his mission on 9/11 vis-a-vis flying a Boeing 757?

And that is assuming he needed to study, which you also haven't established.

It seems your line of reasoning is heavy on speculation and light on supporting evidence Gaff.

[Hotrod]

That brightens up my day. Keep it coming, Gaff. :rofl:

It does just scream area 51 no???

[DomCasual]

There are so many reputable places to get your news. That said, it doesn't get any more reputable than 911mysteryplane.com.

[Rohirrim]

It does just scream area 51 no???

So, Area 51 is a secret Saudi base where they train terrorists to attack us? All this time we've been in Afghanistan looking for those secret Al Queda bases, and all along, they've been hiding in Nevada? That's very clever. :P

[mhgaffney]

How does failing to remember one number (again taking your word for it) prove that he was unable to study and retain the necessary information (over a matter of weeks) to execute his mission on 9/11 vis-a-vis flying a Boeing 757?

And that is assuming he needed to study, which you also haven't established.

It seems your line of reasoning is heavy on speculation and light on supporting evidence Gaff.

Speculation?

I gave you a half dozen official documents from the 9/11 Commission. They were made public earlier this year. It is the government's own data -- not speculation..

You can confirm everything yourself. Are you too lazy to check the links -- given in my footnotes?

[mhgaffney]

Ro,

Really -- you must be over medicated. I suggest you cut back.

MHG

[The Lone Bolt]

Speculation?

I gave you a half dozen official documents from the 9/11 Commission. They were made public earlier this year. It is the government's own data -- not speculation..

You can confirm everything yourself. Are you too lazy to check the links -- given in my footnotes?

You haven't answered my question.

And yes, you are speculating that Hanjour did not have the knowlege needed to fly the 757 into the Pentagon. Flunking a flight exam weeks before 9/11 does not prove it, nor does forgetting a PIN.

Unless you can point to any of the "half dozen official documents from the 9/11 Commission" which provides conclusive evidence that Hanjour did not have the required knowlege on 9/11, your case is largely based on speculation.

[Rohirrim]

Ro,

Really -- you must be over medicated. I suggest you cut back.

MHG

If only you would divulge your medication secrets. Then perhaps, we would all be chasing black helicopters.

[Hotrod]

So, Area 51 is a secret Saudi base where they train terrorists to attack us? All this time we've been in Afghanistan looking for those secret Al Queda bases, and all along, they've been hiding in Nevada? That's very clever. :P

The whole 9/11 conspiracy got started back in the 70s with the false flag alien crash story. You really need to keep up Roh

[Hotrod]

There are so many reputable places to get your news. That said, it doesn't get any more reputable than 911mysteryplane.com.

I mainly use hotrodsource.com

[Rohirrim]

The whole 9/11 conspiracy got started back in the 70s with the false flag alien crash story. You really need to keep up Roh

So, the aliens provided the technology for the terrorists to take over the jets with box cutters?

[Hotrod]

So, the aliens provided the technology for the terrorists to take over the jets with box cutters?

No see you are in way over your head here Roh. There were no alians just Jews slipping into our society in super secret planes. A couple of them crashed because Allah willed it to be so. The rest of the evil Jews quietly moved into out neighborhoods with the ultimate goal of taking over the universe. Once they have taken control of our government they will set up operation "pork fat" in which a super secret brain washing machine set up in Alaska will begin to begin conditioning the US population.

Its really along story but if your interested I could right and publish a book sometime....

[Rohirrim]

No see you are in way over your head here Roh. There were no alians just Jews slipping into our society in super secret planes. A couple of them crashed because Allah willed it to be so. The rest of the evil Jews quietly moved into out neighborhoods with the ultimate goal of taking over the universe. Once they have taken control of our government they will set up operation "pork fat" in which a super secret brain washing machine set up in Alaska will begin to begin conditioning the US population.

Its really along story but if your interested I could right and publish a book sometime....

So, they're setting this conditioning machine up in Alaska at the same time that Palin quits office? Coincidence? I think not. 8')

[mhgaffney]

If only you would divulge your medication secrets. Then perhaps, we would all be chasing black helicopters.

I know it sounds un American - but I don't pop pills.

Not to say I don't appreciate the need to get high. A totally normal drive IMO. But after I learned how to get there using meditation/yoga -- no more need for drugs.

So sorry to disappoint you.

I wrote about this in my book about the Naassenes.
www.gnosticsecrets.com

[mhgaffney]

You haven't answered my question.

And yes, you are speculating that Hanjour did not have the knowlege needed to fly the 757 into the Pentagon. Flunking a flight exam weeks before 9/11 does not prove it, nor does forgetting a PIN.

Unless you can point to any of the "half dozen official documents from the 9/11 Commission" which provides conclusive evidence that Hanjour did not have the required knowlege on 9/11, your case is largely based on speculation.


Well, I supposed being challenged as you are - - we shouldn't expect you to connect two simple dots.

The facts in this case are self evident. We have a guy - H Hanjour -- who couldn't pass a flight test in one of the simplest one engine planes, a Cessna 172.

Yet, just weeks later this same guy managed an extremely difficult top gun maneuver in a Boeing 757 -- and crashed into the Pentagon at 500+ MPH.

Not possible. Not even remotely. Especially since the FBI file on Hanjour presents not an iota of evidence that the guy trained in a 757. From the record Hanjour never made it past the 737 simulator.

Of course, given your deep need to believe whatever your government tells you -- I understand your dilemma.

This photo sums it up.


MHG

[Hotrod]

I know it sounds un American - but I don't pop pills.

Not to say I don't appreciate the need to get high. A totally normal drive IMO. But after I learned how to get there using meditation/yoga -- no more need for drugs.

So sorry to disappoint you.

I wrote about this in my book about the Naassenes.
www.gnosticsecrets.com

Your obviously just another knee jerk

[The Lone Bolt]

Well, I supposed being challenged as you are - - we shouldn't expect you to connect two simple dots.

The facts in this case are self evident. We have a guy - H Hanjour -- who couldn't pass a flight test in one of the simplest one engine planes, a Cessna 172.

Yet, just weeks later this same guy managed an extremely difficult top gun maneuver in a Boeing 757 -- and crashed into the Pentagon at 500+ MPH.

Not possible. Not even remotely. Especially since the FBI file on Hanjour presents not an iota of evidence that the guy trained in a 757. From the record Hanjour never made it past the 737 simulator.

Of course, given your deep need to believe whatever your government tells you -- I understand your dilemma.

This photo sums it up.


MHG



And you have a deep need to believe whatever the troofers tell you -- I understand your dilemma.

Once again you are claiming that something is "impossible" without supporting that claim with a shred of evidence. You believe it's impossible because you want to, not because you have any actual proof.

I believe that's a picture of you up there.

[mhgaffney]

Hot rod,

Spoken like a true book burner.

[Hotrod]

Hot rod,

Spoken like a true book burner.

I wont lie Gaffo I would use your book to light the fire place in winter Ha!

[The Lone Bolt]

I wont lie Gaffo I would use your book to light the fire place in winter Ha!

Speaking of which, can I get a few copies of your book Gaff? I'm all out of toilet paper.;D

[mhgaffney]

My article went up today on the Internet and has stirred the pot -- that's putting it mildly.

Look what commercial pilot Rob Balsamo has to say about Eddie Shalev, the instructor at Congressional Air Charters who flew with Hanjour and later called him a "good" pilot.

This is in reference to Shalev's testimony to the 9/11 Commission. The link to Shalev's testimony is here:
http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-00551.pdf

**************
First there are so many things wrong with the above (Shalevs testimony) i dont even know where to begin.

1. "Terrain Recognition System"? Are you kidding me? Its known as a Sectional Chart and Pilotage. Something a pilot is taught day one on a cross country flight.

2. Shalev thinks you need a pressurized aircraft above 5000 feet? Really? And he is a "Flight Instructor"?

A quick review of "Eddy (rather than Eddie) Guigui Shalev" at faa.gov.

10834 ANTIGUA TER APT 103
City ROCKVILLE State MD
County MONTGOMERY

His Private Pilot shows Date Of Issue 11/27/2000. Notes to his Private:
ISSUED ON BASIS OF AND VALID ONLY WHEN ACCOMPANIED BY ISRAEL PILOT LICENSE NUMBER(S) 5255 .
ALL LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS ON THE ISRAEL PILOT LICENSE APPLY.

His Flight Instructor Certificate shows a Date Of Issue of 6/22/2009.

Giving 911Myths the benefit of the doubt, if its the same Eddie/Eddy, its possible he got his CFI sooner (the above DOI can be a renewal date) but in less than a year after his Private? If he was a CFI prior to 9/11/01, he wasnt a very good one nor an experienced one, especially thinking Hani would need a pressurized aircraft (oxygen) to transit Washington Class Bravo at 5,000 feet (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif) . Pilot oxygen isnt required until 12,500 feet under Part 91.

Next, you have to believe what "Shalev" has told you.

911Myths also touts an italian pilot who says -

"Hanjour was very lucky in his nefarious endeavour, because a pilot of his
experience, allowed to try multiple instances of the same manoeuvre, would
have a very high failure rate."

911Myths has a habit of touting any type of information as long as it supports the govt story, without scrutiny.... and spending intense amounts of time making excuses for solid information which conflicts with the govt story.

Someone may want to inform 911Myths of people who actually have some decent experience that flew with Hani...

Some actual quotes of people who flew with Hani... people who can be sourced...


Hanjour's own piloting skills were shaky.... eventually was asked to leave by instructors who said his skills were poor and his manner difficult.
he barely knew how to fly
Hastie said Hanjour wasn't much of a pilot
found Hanjour a "weak student" who "was wasting our resources.
He had only the barest understanding what the instruments were there to do
got overwhelmed with the instruments
"I couldn't believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had." Peggy Chevrette, Arizona flight school manager."CBS News (5/10/02)


Those are just a few... click the above source link for many more.

posted at
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=17611

[PaintballCLE]

It was the NWO...........
MHG watch this and write a book on it.....

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tmy0PMgm-Q0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Tmy0PMgm-Q0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[mhgaffney]

Also -- look what someone found when they googled the name Monty Lilley -- mentioned in the Eddie Shalev 9/11 memorandum --
http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-00551.pdf

It turns out that Lilley was the owner of Congressional Air Charters - where Shalev worked -- and where Hanjour rented a plane on Aug 20 --2001.

OK so check out who this guy is:

"Monty Lilley
Owner, Congressional Charters LLC
Current : Owner at Congressional
Past: Station chief, Far East Ops at Aegis" <<<<<<<<<<

"Station chief, Far East Ops
Aegis
(Defense & Space industry)
January 1975 — June 1995 (20 years 6 months)
Intelligence, anti-terrorist activities in the Far East primarily. Continues today on a specific contract basis"
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/7/477/b93

"AEGIS is a London based, privately owned, British security and risk management company with overseas offices in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq and the USA. We have substantial experience and a world-wide client-base, including governments, international agencies and the international corporate sector. We are a registered and active UN contractor, a major security provider to the US government and security advisor to the Lloyds Joint War Risk Committee.

We offer comprehensive advice on every aspect of security – from corporate operations, commercial risk and foreign investment to counter-terrorism, close protection and support to governments. We run a worldwide network of offices, contacts, and associates and our clients further benefit from the extensive capabilities of our personnel, built up through careers in the military, diplomatic and intelligence services, as well as in the police, journalism, the UN, finance and commerce."
http://www.aegisworld.com/index.php/about-us

[mhgaffney]

OK so we have a professional spook -- who quote Continues today on a specific contract basis...

For whom? Governments. Intelligence agencies. Other spooks...

Vely vely interestink...

In case you have not been paying attention -- this was the guy who hired E Shalev -- the Israeli who flew with Hanjour and told the 911 Commission he was a "good" pilot...

goood my ass. Here we are folks -- we have reached the abysmal core --

The official story of 911 is in free fall

even as we speak. More to come. Stay tuned.

[Pseudofool]

I'm fine with being cynical that a bunch of poorly trained crazies could fly planes into such and such. So what do the tin foil hatters offer as an alternative? What the **** did happen, if not Muslim extremism?

[Spider]

Ok I just did it with flight simulator. I missed the first time but hit right on top of it the second time. Crashing a plane not as tough as you think Gaff. It's landing them safely that is tough.

;D My grad dad before he passed would take us grankids flying in his plane ....Flight simulator is nothing like the real thing .........

[mhgaffney]

You clowns should listen to Spider.

[Spider]

You clowns should listen to Spider.

the biggest difference is descending ......Wind, low altitude ,diiffers greatly in high altitude and wind , then the plane your flying differs ......there is just alot of little things that are not included in a flight simulator , the closest Simulator I have ever used was in Houston texas , but that damn thing was 40.00 a pop ....

[mhgaffney]

I'm fine with being cynical that a bunch of poorly trained crazies could fly planes into such and such. So what do the tin foil hatters offer as an alternative? What the **** did happen, if not Muslim extremism?

What happened was a coup d'etat -- staged by the powers that be. For the purpose of moving the nation permanently to the right and mobilizing the war machine.

Given America's waning economic strength -- due largely to the hollowing out of US heavy industry since the 1980s -- offshored to China and elsewhere -- by the very same people responsible for this new imperialism

They understood better than anyone the urgent necessity of making a bid for permanent global supremacy. It would be achieved by controlling the oil fields in the Mideast and Central Asia -- and by secretly weaponizing space -- to give the US full spectrum dominance.

The very same strategy would serve to limit and hopefully restrain China's exploding economy

America's last chance at world domination rested solely on its military supremacy. Indeed -- an expanded use of military strength was necessary just to maintain the US role as global superpower.

The problem was that the American people would not support this vastly expanded use of military force world wide. So, as always, an enemy was needed to scare the American people into giving up their liberties and supporting the war machine.

You know the rest of the story. It's history -- yet -- is still unfolding...

[Pseudofool]

What happened was a coup d'etat -- staged by the powers that be. For the purpose of moving the nation permanently to the right and mobilizing the war machine.

Given America's waning economic strength -- due largely to the hollowing out of US heavy industry since the 1980s -- offshored to China and elsewhere -- by the very same people responsible for this new imperialism

They understood better than anyone the urgent necessity of making a bid for permanent global supremacy. It would be achieved by controlling the oil fields in the Mideast and Central Asia -- and by secretly weaponizing space -- to give the US full spectrum dominance.

The very same strategy would serve to limit and hopefully restrain China's exploding economy

America's last chance at world domination rested solely on its military supremacy. Indeed -- an expanded use of military strength was necessary just to maintain the US role as global superpower.

The problem was that the American people would not support this vastly expanded use of military force world wide. So, as always, an enemy was needed to scare the American people into giving up their liberties and supporting the war machine.

You know the rest of the story. It's history -- yet -- is still unfolding...Well, if I concede your point. They basically elected Obama. You don't have Obama w/o Bush era idiocy. There's are some short term thinking global supremacists. I mean, I understand how desparately power wants to maintain control of the means of production, but if 9/11 was the plan it seems so ill-fated and short-sighted. One would expect a continuous of terror attacks to legitimize the threat (and don't mention anthrax please).

My view of the evil of history, capitalism, globalization, power mongering , etc., is that it happens as result of long standing institutional powers and not with actual human intent. It's hard for me to imagine when and where and with whom such a plan is concocted.

[SoCalBronco]

Hey Gaff, I have a question for you.

Would you nail Tzipi Livni? I mean...for a slightly older lady and a prime minister, she's pretty hot. Probably THE premier MILF of all currently serving heads of state.

Your posts would lead a finder of fact to reasonably conclude that you aren't getting any. So here is your chance, Gaff.

So which is it, Gaff? Would you nail the PM, or would your hatred of her people make you too "principled" for it? This is a real dilemma to be sure. On one hand, Gaff will probably never get within 30 feet of a woman, again. On the other hand, he hates the Jews.

What say you, Gaff?

http://incogman.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/livni-small.jpg

[Hotrod]

I have complete confidence in the fact I could sucessfully crash a plane 10 times out of 10 if I were the pilot. Ha!

[Rohirrim]

What happened was a coup d'etat -- staged by the powers that be. For the purpose of moving the nation permanently to the right and mobilizing the war machine.

Given America's waning economic strength -- due largely to the hollowing out of US heavy industry since the 1980s -- offshored to China and elsewhere -- by the very same people responsible for this new imperialism

They understood better than anyone the urgent necessity of making a bid for permanent global supremacy. It would be achieved by controlling the oil fields in the Mideast and Central Asia -- and by secretly weaponizing space -- to give the US full spectrum dominance.

The very same strategy would serve to limit and hopefully restrain China's exploding economy

America's last chance at world domination rested solely on its military supremacy. Indeed -- an expanded use of military strength was necessary just to maintain the US role as global superpower.

The problem was that the American people would not support this vastly expanded use of military force world wide. So, as always, an enemy was needed to scare the American people into giving up their liberties and supporting the war machine.

You know the rest of the story. It's history -- yet -- is still unfolding...

Every assertion in this post is false. I think Gaff has hit the trifecta! ;D

[The Lone Bolt]

Here's an interesting read:

here's an interesting quote from air traffic controller Danielle O'Brien that discusses this:

"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," says O'Brien. "You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."
Source: http://www.911review.com/cache/errors/pentagon/abcnews102401b.html
(Note: that's an interesting article to read, not because of what it says about the conspiracy theory, but simply because it's interesting to read about the day's events from an air traffic controller at work that day)

The first half of O'Brien's statement is often cited by conspiracy theorists as evidence that some sort of military plane crashed into the Pentagon. It's amazing how including the second half of the quote debunks that argument entirely. But please note that the air traffic controllers didn't say that such a feat was IMPOSSIBLE, just that it was DANGEROUS.

So could Hani Hanjour fly a large plane like that? There are a lot of mixed feelings on the issue. It is important to note, however, that Hanjour did not take off in this plane, nor did he land it, at least not properly (that's putting it lightly). Therefore, it shouldn't be too much of a surprise to hear that he had trouble with takeoffs and landings in his flight tests. I'll cite a useful excerpt from a pilot in an aerospaceweb.org article, which will be discussed in more detail in my next post:

"People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that's the hard part!"
Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

Hanjour tried renting his Cessna at Freeway Airport in Bowie, Maryland. Despite failing his test to rent that Cessna 172, the Chief Flight Instructor at that airport, Marcel Bernard, had this to say about Hanjour:

"There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it."
Source: http://www.pentagonresearch.com/Newsday_com.htm

As for Hanjour's flight instruction, he was not necessarily a complete failure.

"Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough. The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa. An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001."
Source: http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-243.html
(continues to "Report-244)


Hanjour was no ace, but he did seem to know a thing or two about flying, otherwise how could he complete that training?

To say that he executed all these maneuvers with complete perfection is not necessarily true either. The following picture shows the final moments of Flight 77's flight path before hitting the Pentagon:

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m80/911debunker/77FlightPath.jpg

As you can see, Hanjour didn't fly over the Pentagon during this turn. He was, in fact, at an elevation of about 8,000 feet before executing the turn, and at the end of the turn, he was down to about 2,000 feet. Makes sense, doesn't it? If Hanjour really knew what he was doing, he wouldn't have needed to do his giant turn and decrease his altitude so he could slam the plane into the Pentagon. He would have been at a low enough altitude in the first place! Many have argued that some sort of expert pilot, or possibly even a computer or remote control device, was actually flying this plane, which is why its end collision was so precise. However, this seems like a pretty major flaw to me, especially if it was controlled by computer. Why would this computer or expert pilot have screwed up the elevation like that? The only reasonable assumption, if you ask me, is that the flight was flown by someone who can fly, but can't necessarily fly well. i.e. Hani Hanjour.

So Hanjour had to correct for being too high on his approach. Would this be a mistake a "Top Gun" pilot would make?

BTW Gaff, did you speak to Mr. Bernard about the flunked test? His opinion (above) is that in spite of Hanjour failing that test (the one you cite to support your argument), he still would have been able to pull off his mission on 9/11. Perhaps you could get a more detailed explanation from him?

[orangeatheist]

I know it sounds un American - but I don't pop pills.

Not to say I don't appreciate the need to get high. A totally normal drive IMO. But after I learned how to get there using meditation/yoga -- no more need for drugs.

So sorry to disappoint you.

I wrote about this in my book about the Naassenes.
www.gnosticsecrets.com

Well, that seals it. Gaff is a troofer AND a gnostic New Ager.

Hey Gaff, welcome to the 1980s. How was your Harmonic Convergence?

[24champ]

Hey Gaff, I have a question for you.

Would you nail Tzipi Livni? I mean...for a slightly older lady and a prime minister, she's pretty hot. Probably THE premier MILF of all currently serving heads of state.

Your posts would lead a finder of fact to reasonably conclude that you aren't getting any. So here is your chance, Gaff.

So which is it, Gaff? Would you nail the PM, or would your hatred of her people make you too "principled" for it? This is a real dilemma to be sure. On one hand, Gaff will probably never get within 30 feet of a woman, again. On the other hand, he hates the Jews.

What say you, Gaff?

http://incogman.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/livni-small.jpg

Yeah Gaffo...which Jew would you nail?

Mila Kunis (Ukranian/Jewish)
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l83/aruhnka/MilaKunis2.jpg

or

Natalie Portman

http://evankessler.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/natalie_portman_381576a.jpg

or

Isla Fisher (Wedding Crasher nympho)

http://d.yimg.com/movies.aunz.yimg.com/2005/photos/main/39892.jpg

or

Scarlett Johansson

http://www.herfashionstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/scarlett_johansson.jpg

[mhgaffney]

Lone Bolt,

I spoke with Bernard and with Ben Conner who flew with Hanjour. Both of them agreed that Hanjour was at best a novice pilot. What Bernard told me is not consistent with your statement about him. Based on what they told me -- I'm sure both were surprised by the news account that Hanjour flew AA 77.

These instructors at Freeway contacted the FBI about Hanjour -- and were interviewed and debriefed by FBI agents. So why is their report about Hanjour absent from the FBI file on Hanjour? And why is it also absent from the 9/11 Commission Report. The reason is obvious. Their testimony did not agree with the official story -- which was decided ahead of time. The commission worked in reverse to find evidence to support it. Need I mention? This is no way to conduct an investigation.

As for your quote that "Hanjour finished his training," you are reading in what you want. You are talking about the simulator training at Jet Tech -- which took place in Feb-March 2001 -- about 5 weeks of training. Yes, but Hanjour's instructor basically flunked him. I gave the link to his written evaluation. Did you even look at it?

So how do you get from a basically failed training in a 737 simulator -- to the dubious conclusion that now Hanjour was now qualified to fly a 757?

You can't get there from here. sorry.

[mhgaffney]

I have complete confidence in the fact I could sucessfully crash a plane 10 times out of 10 if I were the pilot. Ha!

You would be wrong -- unless you had practiced that specific maneuver dozens of times to make it second nature.

Why do you think military fighter pilots practice bombing and strafing runs? In fact they do these practice runs hundreds of times to get good at it. Practice makes perfect.

Do you know the story of Dan Govatos? At the time of 911 he was a Boeing 737 instructor and was finishing up teaching a class of pilots in a 737 simulator. The day after 9/11 -- he took his students -- all of whom were experienced pilots - back into the 737 simulator -- set it for the WTC - and tried to hit it.

But not one of them could do it -- despite multiple attempts. And remember these were pilots with years of experience -- all of whom had just successfully completed their training in a 737 simulator.

You have no idea. It is extremely difficult to crash a commercial airliner into a building at high speed. At low speed no problem -- but at high speed it becomes very difficult.

Supposedly AA 77 hit the Pentagon at 500+ MPH. That is really moving -- at that altitude -- tree top level.

You and the other bozos on this bus do not appreciate the level of difficulty. For whatever reason. Probably because you have a deep need to believe the official story. The alternative is just too scary. That's my take.

You need to get a clue.

[mhgaffney]

And don't forget -- a 737 is considerably smaller and more maneuverable than a 757.

If a pilot couldn't do it in a 737 -- no way could he do it in a 757. Impossible. Face it. The official story is a fabrication -- a lie.

[mhgaffney]

So Cal,

I don't make distinctions between Jewish or non Jewish women -- for the same reason I don't distinguish between Jews and non Jews.

Whether a person is blue, green, black, yellow, Muslim, Catholic, Protestant or Jewish has no relevance approximately 100% of the time.

You are grasping at a phantom you dreamed up in your (overmedicated? intoxicated?) imagination.

My opposition to Zionism has no connection to Judaism. They are two different things. End of story.

[The Lone Bolt]

Lone Bolt,

I spoke with Bernard and with Ben Conner who flew with Hanjour. Both of them agreed that Hanjour was at best a novice pilot. What Bernard told me is not consistent with your statement about him. Based on what they told me -- I'm sure both were surprised by the news account that Hanjour flew AA 77.

These instructors at Freeway contacted the FBI about Hanjour -- and were interviewed and debriefed by FBI agents. So why is their report about Hanjour absent from the FBI file on Hanjour? And why is it also absent from the 9/11 Commission Report. The reason is obvious. Their testimony did not agree with the official story -- which was decided ahead of time. The commission worked in reverse to find evidence to support it. Need I mention? This is no way to conduct an investigation.

As for your quote that "Hanjour finished his training," you are reading in what you want. You are talking about the simulator training at Jet Tech -- which took place in Feb-March 2001 -- about 5 weeks of training. Yes, but Hanjour's instructor basically flunked him. I gave the link to his written evaluation. Did you even look at it?

So how do you get from a basically failed training in a 737 simulator -- to the dubious conclusion that now Hanjour was now qualified to fly a 757?

You can't get there from here. sorry.

Yes you can. Gaff, Hanjour didn't need to be able to take off or land. He didn't need to be able to fly in poor weather. He didn't need many of the skills required to be a good pilot. All he needed to do was be able to steer a plane into a building. So saying he was a "novice pilot" does not necessarily mean he lacked the basic skills needed to crash a jetliner into the Pentagon. You are the one reading in what you want.

And Bernard's opinion is clear and in plain English above. He is quoted verbatim. Perhaps you should follow up with him, present him with the quote supplied above, and ask him to clarify. I think you may have misunderstood his position.

[The Lone Bolt]

You would be wrong -- unless you had practiced that specific maneuver dozens of times to make it second nature.

Why do you think military fighter pilots practice bombing and strafing runs? In fact they do these practice runs hundreds of times to get good at it. Practice makes perfect.

Do you know the story of Dan Govatos? At the time of 911 he was a Boeing 737 instructor and was finishing up teaching a class of pilots in a 737 simulator. The day after 9/11 -- he took his students -- all of whom were experienced pilots - back into the 737 simulator -- set it for the WTC - and tried to hit it.

But not one of them could do it -- despite multiple attempts. And remember these were pilots with years of experience -- all of whom had just successfully completed their training in a 737 simulator.

You have no idea. It is extremely difficult to crash a commercial airliner into a building at high speed. At low speed no problem -- but at high speed it becomes very difficult.

Supposedly AA 77 hit the Pentagon at 500+ MPH. That is really moving -- at that altitude -- tree top level.

You and the other bozos on this bus do not appreciate the level of difficulty. For whatever reason. Probably because you have a deep need to believe the official story. The alternative is just too scary. That's my take.

You need to get a clue.



So Gaff, you speak with the experience of a trained pilot. What's your aviation background?

[The Lone Bolt]

OK Gaff I looked over the Jet Tech instructors notes. He describes Hanjour as "very intelligent" and says absolutely nothing that suggests Hanjour did not have the skills needed to steer a jetliner into a building.

He reports that Hanjour's "basic aircraft control was marginal" i.e. barely adequate, but not completely incompetent (as you have suggested).

You are grasping at straws here.

[mhgaffney]

According to commercial pilot Philip Marshall, who is licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s, Hanjour would have been "all over the sky..."

In other words - he would have been completely lost in the cockpit of a 757. I suggest you check Marshall's book FALSE FLAG 911.

Rob Balsamo -- another commercial pilot - agrees with Marshall and says the final approach of AA 77 was an extremely tough maneuver. No way an amateur could have done it. This comes from a licensed pilot. So who are you to think you know better? Are you licensed to fly a commercial plane?

Of course not. You are a therapist. Get a clue.

Also -- your argument that its easy to fly if you don't have to land is garbage. Sure -- one needs to know how to use only some of the controls -- but how would a rank amateur like Hanjour know WHICH of the controls?

To Hanjour they would all look the same.

You say the flight instructor called Hanjour intelligent -- but you ignore the fact that he flunked Hanjour -

In short, you are doing exactly what the commission did -- cherry picking the evidence to fit your fixed idea.

So pathetic. If this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the poor souls who come to you for counseling.

MHG

[W*GS]

gaffney, you're pathetic and disgusting.

[DenverBrit]

Gaffney, as usual you quote other Troofers as evidence of what exactly?

Why don't you answer the question you've been asked many times. If not the 'hijackers' who were the 'kamikazi' pilots who flew the planes into each building?

And why is it that a looney organic farmer with a poetry background knows what no one else knows?

You say you don't pop pills.....you really should, you're in dire need. :loopy:

[Tom H.]

Hey Mark did you ever get back to Gravy (Mark Roberts)?

(post #24) http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=135322

"http://forums.randi.org/images/smilies/biggrin.gif This reminds me of Mark Gaffney, the guy who wrote the book about the "mystery plane" that's no mystery. He wrote to me, said he'd been reading my site and had some issues with my analysis. He asked me to read his detailed analysis of NIST's report on the Twin Towers. He'd had it online for over a year.

I responded that I got as far as the part in the first paragraph where he called NIST the "National Institute of Safety and Transportation," then I closed the window. I asked him to get back to me in a year if he'd actually read the report by then.

He replied that he didn't think anyone had read the whole report. I said that not only had I read it, but I'd studied much of it, taken copious notes, read several analyses of its methods and conclusions, and read many other engineering reports. I corrected him about the gross errors he'd made in the few killer points he attempted to make by email.

He said he'd get back to me. That was in 2007."

[Rohirrim]

Hey Mark did you ever get back to Gravy (Mark Roberts)?

(post #24) http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=135322

"http://forums.randi.org/images/smilies/biggrin.gif This reminds me of Mark Gaffney, the guy who wrote the book about the "mystery plane" that's no mystery. He wrote to me, said he'd been reading my site and had some issues with my analysis. He asked me to read his detailed analysis of NIST's report on the Twin Towers. He'd had it online for over a year.

I responded that I got as far as the part in the first paragraph where he called NIST the "National Institute of Safety and Transportation," then I closed the window. I asked him to get back to me in a year if he'd actually read the report by then.

He replied that he didn't think anyone had read the whole report. I said that not only had I read it, but I'd studied much of it, taken copious notes, read several analyses of its methods and conclusions, and read many other engineering reports. I corrected him about the gross errors he'd made in the few killer points he attempted to make by email.

He said he'd get back to me. That was in 2007."

Of course he didn't. After this exchange he realized Mark Roberts was one of the co-conspirators. (they're everywhere, you know?)

[The Lone Bolt]

According to commercial pilot Philip Marshall, who is licensed to fly 727s, 737s, 747s, 757s and 767s, Hanjour would have been "all over the sky..."

In other words - he would have been completely lost in the cockpit of a 757. I suggest you check Marshall's book FALSE FLAG 911.

Rob Balsamo -- another commercial pilot - agrees with Marshall and says the final approach of AA 77 was an extremely tough maneuver. No way an amateur could have done it. This comes from a licensed pilot. So who are you to think you know better? Are you licensed to fly a commercial plane?

Of course not. You are a therapist. Get a clue.

Also -- your argument that its easy to fly if you don't have to land is garbage. Sure -- one needs to know how to use only some of the controls -- but how would a rank amateur like Hanjour know WHICH of the controls?

To Hanjour they would all look the same.

You say the flight instructor called Hanjour intelligent -- but you ignore the fact that he flunked Hanjour -

In short, you are doing exactly what the commission did -- cherry picking the evidence to fit your fixed idea.

So pathetic. If this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the poor souls who come to you for counseling.

MHG



Sure I'm no pilot. But unlike you I'm not claiming to be an expert in aviation. I'm just pointing out that you have not made your case.

And sure, you can find a couple of troofers out there with pilots licenses who voice opinions that support your argument. But have either of these pilots backed up thier opinions with hard evidence and analysis proving conclusively that:

A) the manuvers required extraordinary piloting skill, and

B) Hanjour did not have the skills as of 9/11 to perform such manuvers?

You may be willing to just take their word for it Gaff, but I'm not. Let's see an analysis heavy on evidence and light on opinion.

[The Lone Bolt]

Hey Mark did you ever get back to Gravy (Mark Roberts)?

(post #24) http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=135322

"http://forums.randi.org/images/smilies/biggrin.gif This reminds me of Mark Gaffney, the guy who wrote the book about the "mystery plane" that's no mystery. He wrote to me, said he'd been reading my site and had some issues with my analysis. He asked me to read his detailed analysis of NIST's report on the Twin Towers. He'd had it online for over a year.

I responded that I got as far as the part in the first paragraph where he called NIST the "National Institute of Safety and Transportation," then I closed the window. I asked him to get back to me in a year if he'd actually read the report by then.

He replied that he didn't think anyone had read the whole report. I said that not only had I read it, but I'd studied much of it, taken copious notes, read several analyses of its methods and conclusions, and read many other engineering reports. I corrected him about the gross errors he'd made in the few killer points he attempted to make by email.

He said he'd get back to me. That was in 2007."


LOL LOL ROFL! ROFL!

[mhgaffney]

No one has responded to my question: WHY DID THE FBI IGNORE THE WRITTEN EVALUATION OF THE 737 FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR WHO FLUNKED HANJOUR in March 2001?

AND WHY DID THE FBI IGNORE THE FREEWAY REPORT THAT HANJOUR FLUNKED A FLIGHT TEST IN A ONE ENGINE CESSNA JUST WEEKS BEFORE 9/11?

The 9/11 Commission did the same. You clowns are desperate -- You attack me because you are unnerved by the implications.

[mhgaffney]

As for Mark Roberts, he cited a typo as reason NOT to review my paper.

And you accept this explanation?

[The Lone Bolt]

As for Mark Roberts, he cited a typo as reason NOT to review my paper.

And you accept this explanation?

Well he claims that he corrected you on much more than a typo. Then you said you'd get back to him on his points and never did. Is that the case?

[Rohirrim]

No one has responded to my question: WHY DID THE FBI IGNORE THE WRITTEN EVALUATION OF THE 737 FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR WHO FLUNKED HANJOUR in March 2001?

AND WHY DID THE FBI IGNORE THE FREEWAY REPORT THAT HANJOUR FLUNKED A FLIGHT TEST IN A ONE ENGINE CESSNA JUST WEEKS BEFORE 9/11?

The 9/11 Commission did the same. You clowns are desperate -- You attack me because you are unnerved by the implications.

They ignored the minutae because there is a mountain of evidence that he flew a hijacked plane into the Pentagon. Who cares whether he was a crappy pilot or not? That comes after the fact. You want them to ignore the elephant and focus on the gnat as if the presence of the gnat will negate the existence of the elephant. You have yet, in all these tin foil hat threads you've launched, to posit an alternate hypothesis.

Let's hear it.

[The Lone Bolt]

They ignored the minutae because there is a mountain of evidence that he flew a hijacked plane into the Pentagon. Who cares whether he was a crappy pilot or not? That comes after the fact. You want them to ignore the elephant and focus on the gnat as if the presence of the gnat will negate the existence of the elephant. You have yet, in all these tin foil hat threads you've launched, to posit an alternate hypothesis.

Let's hear it.

You must have missed the whole remote-controlled airplane nonsense.

[mhgaffney]

My 2008 updated NIST paper was free of typos. Roberts still won't look at it.
Same with you clowns.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18999.htm

[mhgaffney]

They ignored the minutae because there is a mountain of evidence that he flew a hijacked plane into the Pentagon. Who cares whether he was a crappy pilot or not? That comes after the fact. You want them to ignore the elephant and focus on the gnat as if the presence of the gnat will negate the existence of the elephant. You have yet, in all these tin foil hat threads you've launched, to posit an alternate hypothesis.

Let's hear it.

You are a work.

So the written evaluation of Hanjour's flight instructor -- showing that he did not have the skills to fly a 737 -- let alone a bigger 757 -- is "minutiae"?!

hahahahahahahahahahaha

Like I said -- you show signs of being over medicated. I'd cut back -- my friend. For your own good.

[The Lone Bolt]

My 2008 updated NIST paper was free of typos. Roberts still won't look at it.
Same with you clowns.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18999.htm

How about the rebuttal he made pointing out your alleged errors? Have you responded to him on those specific points?

[Rohirrim]

You are a work.

So the written evaluation of Hanjour's flight instructor -- showing that he did not have the skills to fly a 737 -- let alone a bigger 757 -- is "minutiae"?!

hahahahahahahahahahaha

Like I said -- you show signs of being over medicated. I'd cut back -- my friend. For your own good.

I'll try again: What is your alternative explanation?

[mhgaffney]

Look, everyone has their own opinion about what happened at the Pentagon -- and on 9/11.

What I think is not at issue.

I have shown that the FBI and 9/11 Commission suppressed key evidence -- key because it pertained to Hanjour's ability to fly the allegedly hijacked plane. Clearly -- he could not have done what they say he did.

The official investigation was a cover up -- a scam. We ned a new REAL inquiry by forensic experts and real detectives back to determine what really happened.

BTW the conclusion of my NIST paper was confirmed by the announcement in May 2007 that Dr Steven Jones had found residues of high temp explosives in the WTC dust.

This early announcement has now been fully documented in three scientific papers published in peer reviewed science journals in the last few months.

Has any physical evidence been forthcoming in support of Mark Roberts? Answer: Nope.

Yet you listen to him?

[Hotrod]

Look, everyone has their own opinion about what happened at the Pentagon -- and on 9/11.

What I think is not at issue.

I have shown that the FBI and 9/11 Commission suppressed key evidence -- key because it pertained to Hanjour's ability to fly the allegedly hijacked plane. Clearly -- he could not have done what they say he did.

The official investigation was a cover up -- a scam. We ned a new REAL inquiry by forensic experts and real detectives back to determine what really happened.

BTW the conclusion of my NIST paper was confirmed by the announcement in May 2007 that Dr Steven Jones had found residues of high temp explosives in the WTC dust.

This early announcement has now been fully documented in three scientific papers published in peer reviewed science journals in the last few months.

Has any physical evidence been forthcoming in support of Mark Roberts? Answer: Nope.

Yet you listen to him?


It was Jewish aliens wasnt it Ha!

[The Lone Bolt]

Look, everyone has their own opinion about what happened at the Pentagon -- and on 9/11.

What I think is not at issue.

I have shown that the FBI and 9/11 Commission suppressed key evidence -- key because it pertained to Hanjour's ability to fly the allegedly hijacked plane. Clearly -- he could not have done what they say he did.

The official investigation was a cover up -- a scam. We ned a new REAL inquiry by forensic experts and real detectives back to determine what really happened.

BTW the conclusion of my NIST paper was confirmed by the announcement in May 2007 that Dr Steven Jones had found residues of high temp explosives in the WTC dust.

This early announcement has now been fully documented in three scientific papers published in peer reviewed science journals in the last few months.

Has any physical evidence been forthcoming in support of Mark Roberts? Answer: Nope.

Yet you listen to him?



So why don't you contact him and lay out your case? Why aren't you responding to his criticisms of your claims?

[gyldenlove]

Free fall?

If we say the collapse took 11 seconds, that is in the middle of the 10-12 you quote, I have no idea if that is right or not, but since you claim it I will go with it.

I will go with WTC2 as an example, but this works out about the same for WTC1. The tower collapsed around floor 75, out of 100, that means the free fall time should be around 7.5 seconds. You quote 11, giving an acceleration of about 4.6 m/s2 which is less than half of the actual accelration, so the remainder of the tower did slow the fall significantly.

Interestingly, your intertial argument is entirely inverted from the truth. You say that the falling part of the tower encountered greater inertia as it fell, which is not true. What actually happened is that the falling mass increased as it fill as it picked up the parts of the building it collapsed on, so by the time the collapse reached the lower floors the entire weight of the building was falling on the support beams. You can illustrate this easily if you take some sticks and some gym weight disks, build a smaller tower with sticks holding a disk, then sticks on that disk holding another etc. You can build this as tall as you can reach, use thicker sticks at the bottom. Then drop a weight disk on the top "floor" as soon as the top floor supports give way, both the falling disk and the top floor will fall down and impact on the next floor breaking the thicker sticks etc. The falling part keeps getting heavier so even though the supports get stronger, they can't hold.

I am going to go out on a limb here, but I would speculate that the reason no other steel skyscraper has collapsed is because none has ever had a large heavy weight dropped on them.

Again, your pulverization analogy is pretty wide off the mark. During an earthquake the force that causes buildings to collapse is sheer-stress. essentially causing the buildings the break and fall over sideways, hence the accordion like pattern. The WTC collapsed top down with impact force which as people who have ever used a hammer on concrete will know causes pulverization since concrete has very little tensile strength.

[Rohirrim]

Look, everyone has their own opinion about what happened at the Pentagon -- and on 9/11.

What I think is not at issue.

I have shown that the FBI and 9/11 Commission suppressed key evidence -- key because it pertained to Hanjour's ability to fly the allegedly hijacked plane. Clearly -- he could not have done what they say he did.

The official investigation was a cover up -- a scam. We ned a new REAL inquiry by forensic experts and real detectives back to determine what really happened.

BTW the conclusion of my NIST paper was confirmed by the announcement in May 2007 that Dr Steven Jones had found residues of high temp explosives in the WTC dust.

This early announcement has now been fully documented in three scientific papers published in peer reviewed science journals in the last few months.

Has any physical evidence been forthcoming in support of Mark Roberts? Answer: Nope.

Yet you listen to him?

If the FBI suppressed this info, how were you able to get it? Seems like they didn't do a very good job of it.

[PaintballCLE]

do you realize how many people would have to have known about this to pull off this conspiracy?

Especially since you are one of the people who probably beleive there were also explosives inside the buildings, explosive pods on the bottoms of planes, and all that other nonsense, etc.....

There is no way its possible.....

[mhgaffney]

I bleed,

One thing the CIA is VERY good at is keeping secrets. The closest we ever came to disclosure was the Church hearings in the 1970s -- and even that was very partial and incomplete.

The CIA's expertise is in deception -- just like the Mossad, whose motto is "BY WAY OF DECEPTION."

The CIA set up a terrorist network in Europe after W W II -- with cells in every NATO country - involving thousands of people - -

This terror network was responsible for hundreds of terror attacks -- bombings -- murders -- coups and attempted coups -- Yet they kept it secret for 40+ years

It only leaked out in Europe in 1990-91 -- and caused a huge scandal. But even so -- here in the US the facts are STILL to this day unknown by 99.9% of Americans because the US TV has never covered it.

Incredible but true.

So of course they can keep secrets. They do this through compartmentalization -- and need to know. Only a few people at the top have the full picture.

Wake up to the dark truths about your own nation.

[mhgaffney]

If the FBI suppressed this info, how were you able to get it? Seems like they didn't do a very good job of it.

I explained this. The 9/11 Commission turned over its files to the National Archives -- where someone made a decision to release some of the information.

There are honest people in the system. Thank G-d.

[PaintballCLE]

I bleed,

One thing the CIA is VERY good at is keeping secrets. The closest we ever came to disclosure was the Church hearings in the 1970s -- and even that was very partial and incomplete.

The CIA's expertise is in deception -- just like the Mossad, whose motto is "BY WAY OF DECEPTION."

The CIA set up a terrorist network in Europe after W W II -- with cells in every NATO country - involving thousands of people - -

This terror network was responsible for hundreds of terror attacks -- bombings -- murders -- coups and attempted coups -- Yet they kept it secret for 40+ years

It only leaked out in Europe in 1990-91 -- and caused a huge scandal. But even so -- here in the US the facts are STILL to this day unknown by 99.9% of Americans because the US TV has never covered it.

Incredible but true.

So of course they can keep secrets. They do this through compartmentalization -- and need to know. Only a few people at the top have the full picture.

Wake up to the dark truths about your own nation.

you missing the bigger picture though.........if there were these "explosive pods: on the bottom of the plane.......do you know how many people would have to be in on it? Everyone from the baggage handlers at the airport, the airline mechanics, the airlines themselves, actually pretty much everyone at the airport,

there is no way its possible

[mhgaffney]

The only error Roberts found was a minor detail -- a point of fact -- that had no bearing on the big picture. In fact, it was so minor I'd have to go back through my emails to identify it.

He never compiled a list of problems or issues with my paper. No one has shown any errors in the analysis -- nor with my conclusions -- not to this day.

But I invite you to try. Of course, to do that you'd have to read the paper -- and dip into the NIST report.

Even a preliminary once through would take you 4-6 weeks of full time work. Good luck. I've already been there and done that so - I will eagerly await your response.

Good luck.

[The Lone Bolt]

The only error Roberts found was a minor detail -- a point of fact -- that had no bearing on the big picture. In fact, it was so minor I'd have to go back through my emails to identify it.

He never compiled a list of problems or issues with my paper. No one has shown any errors in the analysis -- nor with my conclusions -- not to this day.

But I invite you to try. Of course, to do that you'd have to read the paper -- and dip into the NIST report.

Even a preliminary once through would take you 4-6 weeks of full time work. Good luck. I've already been there and done that so - I will eagerly await your response.

Good luck.



Well I've joined the above linked forum. I'll see if he's willing to confirm this.

However his post suggests otherwise:

I corrected him about the gross errors he'd made in the few killer points he attempted to make by email.

[24champ]

I explained this. The 9/11 Commission turned over its files to the National Archives -- where someone made a decision to release some of the information.

There are honest people in the system. Thank G-d.

I thought your god was Allah?

[mhgaffney]

I never said there were pods on the planes.

The issue is the evidence of planted charges in the WTC. The WTC was vastly overbuilt - and could easily support more than twice the anticipated load.

This means you could cut more than half of the columns and the buildings would still stand. Only a very thorough and pre planned wiring of the towers could bring them down.

Even if the local fires and plane impacts caused a structural failure -- and there is no evidence of this. But even if it happened -- the failure would have caused a random, incomplete and asymmetric collapse. It would have taken the path of least resistance --

Yet what we saw was a perfectly symmetrical and comprehensive collapse through the path of greatest resistance. Only explosive charges can do this.

[orangeatheist]

I thought your god was Allah?

No. He'll let you in on the secret when he gets back from his A Course in Miracles meeting. Right after Knight Rider and the Cosby Show.

[The Lone Bolt]

OK Gaff, got a response from Roberts:

... I'll be very glad to post our whole exchange (several emails) here if you can get his written permission to do so. Be warned: Gaffney's statements devolve into sadly typical truther paranoia involving my refusal to credit Steven Jones, William Rodriguez, and others for their accurate 9/11 analyses, followed by an accusation that I am a "DISINFO" agent who will be "exposed" for my wrongdoings. He said (in 2007) that he'd be dealing with me in an upcoming book.

Also, a correction: it wasn't me who discovered that Gaffney, in his "detailed review" of the NIST WTC 1 & 2 reports, calls NIST the "National Institute of Safety and Transportation." That info came from a JREF forum member who nominated Gaffney's blazing firebrand of ignorance for a Stundie award, of which I advised Gaffney. The Stundie is awarded by some JREF forum members to the conspiracist whom they judge to have posted the stupidest or looniest statement of the month. Like most truthers, Gaffney remains untroubled by his own stupidity: his ignorance of what NIST is remains today:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/87904a5680d2bee6a.jpg


My critiques are of Gaffney's statements in his emails to me. Why the hell would I read a "detailed review" written by someone who hasn't read the study he purports to be reviewing and who is ignorant of the role of the agency that produced the study?


Feel free to post this elsewhere if you think it will help.

Care to provide your consent so that we can get the e-mails of your debate with him? I'm sure many of us here are interested, and since he didn't prove anything wrong with your claims other than a "minor detail" you have nothing to worry about, right?

And the image he provides (from http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18999.htm )seems to contradict your claim that your misunderstanding of what NIST stands for was a "typo."

[DenverBrit]

Gaffney remains untroubled by his own stupidity: his ignorance of what NIST is remains today:


QFT

Not only does Gaffney not know what NIST is, he isn't remotely qualified to read and understand it, let alone critique it.

The NIST report has been debated to death in other threads and Gaffney has been schooled each and every time.

[Rohirrim]

followed by an accusation that I am a "DISINFO" agent who will be "exposed" for my wrongdoings.

I called it. ;D

[24champ]

I never said there were pods on the planes.

The issue is the evidence of planted charges in the WTC. The WTC was vastly overbuilt - and could easily support more than twice the anticipated load.

This means you could cut more than half of the columns and the buildings would still stand. Only a very thorough and pre planned wiring of the towers could bring them down.

Even if the local fires and plane impacts caused a structural failure -- and there is no evidence of this. But even if it happened -- the failure would have caused a random, incomplete and asymmetric collapse. It would have taken the path of least resistance --

Yet what we saw was a perfectly symmetrical and comprehensive collapse through the path of greatest resistance. Only explosive charges can do this.

Gaffo, what about this Elizabeth Banks girl? She is jewish...would you (bleep) her?

http://www.tvpredictions.com/hotbanks20.jpg

[theAPAOps5]

Haven't read any of this thread as it was started by Gaffo the Wacko but let me guess he blames the Jews!

[24champ]

Haven't read any of this thread as it was started by Gaffo the Wacko but let me guess he blames the Jews!

You'll have to read his book to find out! Ha!

[mhgaffney]

For the record - I never accused Mark Roberts of being a disinfo agent -- Fact is, I have never accused ANYONE of this.

I probably did say at some point that Roberts is misinformed. Big deal.

NIST stands for National Institute of Standards and Technology -- and yes I did make a typo. Big deal.

A typo has no bearing on the analysis in my NIST paper. Indeed, two structural engineers have praised the paper. One of them, Genady Cherepanov, is an expert on structural failure -- authored a book THE MECHANICS OF BRITTLE FRACTURE

Did Mark Roberts produce anything of significance?

As for the Randi forum -- why would anyone care what goes on there? Take a look at JREF and you will see it is a forum created for the purpose of attacking anyone and everyone.

You may find this amusing -- but it gets old really fast.

I'm still waiting for someone to deal with the substantive issues raised in my paper at the top of this thread.

Like a bunch of lemmings -- you clowns flee from reality. You attack me because you find the facts too scary. Simple as that.

[The Lone Bolt]

For the record - I never accused Mark Roberts of being a disinfo agent -- Fact is, I have never accused ANYONE of this.

I probably did say at some point that Roberts is misinformed. Big deal.

NIST stands for National Institute of Standards and Technology -- and yes I did make a typo. Big deal.

A typo has no bearing on the analysis in my NIST paper. Indeed, two structural engineers have praised the paper. One of them, Genady Cherepanov, is an expert on structural failure -- authored a book THE MECHANICS OF BRITTLE FRACTURE

Did Mark Roberts produce anything of significance?

As for the Randi forum -- why would anyone care what goes on there? Take a look at JREF and you will see it is a forum created for the purpose of attacking anyone and everyone.

You may find this amusing -- but it gets old really fast.

I'm still waiting for someone to deal with the substantive issues raised in my paper at the top of this thread.

Like a bunch of lemmings -- you clowns flee from reality. You attack me because you find the facts too scary. Simple as that.



So do you give permission for Roberts to post your e-mail exchange with him?

And reread the thread. You'll find plenty of substantive responses to your claims (e.g. the fact that you have produced no evidence that the maneuver performed by Flight 77 was a "top gun" maneuver, outside of a couple of opinions).

[DenverBrit]

NIST stands for National Institute of Standards and Technology -- and yes I did make a typo. Big deal.



Typo?? Ha! No, this is a typo: 'Speeling'.

You didn't know what NIST meant, simple as that.

You're a joke of epic proportions.......no typo there.

[orangeatheist]

Typo?? Ha! No, this is a typo: 'Speeling'.

You didn't know what NIST meant, simple as that.

You're a joke of epic proportions.......no typo there.

Otherwise known as a GAFFE

Main Entry: gaffe
Function: noun
Etymology: French, gaff, gaffe
Date: 1909
1 : a social or diplomatic blunder
2 : a noticeable mistake

He has oh so appropriate a name!

[Hotrod]

Otherwise known as a GAFFE

Main Entry: gaffe
Function: noun
Etymology: French, gaff, gaffe
Date: 1909
1 : a social or diplomatic blunder
2 : a noticeable mistake

He has oh so appropriate a name!

LOL

He is really taking a run at bobsanaunt for the OM pincushion of the year

[DenverBrit]

Otherwise known as a GAFFE

Main Entry: gaffe
Function: noun
Etymology: French, gaff, gaffe
Date: 1909
1 : a social or diplomatic blunder
2 : a noticeable mistake

He has oh so appropriate a name!

No kidding!

One interpretation of the origins of the name Gaffney:

2. Possibly an altered spelling of Swiss German Gaf(f)ner, a topographic name for a cottage dweller, from dialect Gafene ‘large basket’, ‘Alpine (dairy) hut’.

It's official. Gaffney is a 'large basket' case. Hilarious!

In popular usage basket case refers to someone in a hopeless mental condition

That's how you connect the dots in a conspiracy, Gaffney! Ha!

[mhgaffney]

Scum rises to the surface in America. We've seen so many examples -- and again on this board -- this thread.

This thread is about how the FBI and 9/11 Commission LIED to the American people. Sorry. There is no other word for it.

They suppressed key evidence about the most important terrorist act ever perpetrated against America.

The article at the top of this thread -- I did a google -- is all over the Internet. When I googled it I got 1600+ hits.

No one has shown any errors in the article. Least of all any one from this board.

The research is a solid as the rock of Gibraltar. I have provided links to the pertinent documents. Everything is footnoted.

So what do you do? Instead of getting PO'ed at your lying political leaders -- you attack me! Who am, after, just a a guy, a writer who is searching for the truth.

You do this because this message -- is sooo unnerving - so threatening -- so subversive to what you think you know -- that you can't deal with it.

Instead of dealing with it -- you go after me. How pathetic!

If Mark Roberts has anything to add to this discussion of Hani Hanjour and Eddy Shalev -- he can register like anyone else and join the discussion.

MHG

[Rohirrim]

Scum rises to the surface in America. We've seen so many examples -- and again on this board -- this thread.

This thread is about how the FBI and 9/11 Commission LIED to the American people. Sorry. There is no other word for it.

They suppressed key evidence about the most important terrorist act ever perpetrated against America.

The article at the top of this thread -- I did a google -- is all over the Internet. When I googled it I got 1600+ hits.

No one has shown any errors in the article. Least of all any one from this board.

The research is a solid as the rock of Gibraltar. I have provided links to the pertinent documents. Everything is footnoted.

So what do you do? Instead of getting PO'ed at your lying political leaders -- you attack me! Who am, after, just a a guy, a writer who is searching for the truth.

You do this because this message -- is sooo unnerving - so threatening -- so subversive to what you think you know -- that you can't deal with it.

Instead of dealing with it -- you go after me. How pathetic!

If Mark Roberts has anything to add to this discussion of Hani Hanjour and Eddy Shalev -- he can register like anyone else and join the discussion.

MHG

As I've explained in at least one prior column, Hani Hanjour's flying was hardly the show-quality demonstration often described. It was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and turns and spirals above the nation's capital revealed him to be exactly the ****ty pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it, possibly with help from the 757's autopilot. Striking a stationary object -- even a large one like the Pentagon -- at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon's lawn.
It's true there's only a vestigial similarity between the cockpit of a light trainer and the flight deck of a Boeing. To put it mildly, the attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league. However, they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category 3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system. For good measure, at least two of the terrorist pilots had rented simulator time in jet aircraft, but striking the Pentagon, or navigating along the Hudson River to Manhattan on a cloudless morning, with the sole intention of steering head-on into a building, did not require a mastery of airmanship. The perpetrators had purchased manuals and videos describing the flight management systems of the 757/767, and as any desktop simulator enthusiast will tell you, elementary operation of the planes' navigational units and autopilots is chiefly an exercise in data programming. You can learn it at home. You won't be good, but you'll be good enough.
"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."
"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."
"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."
That sentiment is echoed by Joe d'Eon, airline pilot and host of the "Fly With Me" podcast series. "It's the difference between a doctor and a butcher," says d'Eon. http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Flight_School_Dropouts

[DenverBrit]

So what do you do? Instead of getting PO'ed at your lying political leaders -- you attack me! Who am, after, just a a guy, a writer who is searching for the truth.
MHG

No, you're a self-serving, pompous ass who spends way too much time on a football board talking down to everyone.

The only 'truth' you're interested in is anything, no matter how obscure, that you can use to bolster your conspiracy theories and pat yourself on the back.

Making a buck off those who lost loved ones in the 911 tragedy makes you a leach and nothing more.
So spare us your pathetic 'I'm just the messenger' mantra, you're fooling no one.

[Rohirrim]

Any case sounds convincing when you only present one side of it.

[The Lone Bolt]

If Mark Roberts has anything to add to this discussion of Hani Hanjour and Eddy Shalev -- he can register like anyone else and join the discussion.

MHG

Roberts has already said he has plenty to add in the form of your e-mail exchange. So do you give your consent for him to reproduce those e-mails?

What are you afraid of?

[SoCalBronco]

.

Making a buck off those who lost loved ones in the 911 tragedy makes you a leach and nothing more.
So spare us your pathetic 'I'm just the messenger' mantra, you're fooling no one.

QFT. :thumbsup:

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=23552&stc=1&d=1235861071

(Hat tip to W*GS for this)

[TDmvp]

No, you're a self-serving, pompous ass who spends way too much time on a football board talking down to everyone.

The only 'truth' you're interested in is anything, no matter how obscure, that you can use to bolster your conspiracy theories and pat yourself on the back.

Making a buck off those who lost loved ones in the 911 tragedy makes you a leach and nothing more.
So spare us your pathetic 'I'm just the messenger' mantra, you're fooling no one.



Great post , Rep , and basically how I think most here feel about Gaff ...

[TDmvp]

Yeah Gaffo...which Jew would you nail?

Mila Kunis (Ukranian/Jewish)
http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l83/aruhnka/MilaKunis2.jpg

or

Natalie Portman

http://evankessler.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/natalie_portman_381576a.jpg

or

Isla Fisher (Wedding Crasher nympho)

http://d.yimg.com/movies.aunz.yimg.com/2005/photos/main/39892.jpg

or

Scarlett Johansson

http://www.herfashionstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/scarlett_johansson.jpg




And that's easy ... Mila Mila Mila ...

[Northman]

So do you give permission for Roberts to post your e-mail exchange with him?



I would be interested in reading those email exchanges.

[TDmvp]

Like a bunch of lemmings -- you clowns flee from reality. You attack me because you find the facts too scary. Simple as that.

Jeez it must be a Sh#t existence where you are so stuck on yourself that you get off on patting yourself on the back ...

There is not a poster on the mane who blows themselves as much as you Gaff .


You really need to get a life or a hobby ... Might I once again suggest solo erotic asphyxiation.

[W*GS]

Scum rises to the surface in America. We've seen so many examples -- and again on this board -- this thread.

One definition of "scum" is "a person who personally profits from the murders of thousands of people".

Yep, gaffney - you're scum. Mother****ing scum.

[W*GS]

There is not a poster on the mane who blows themselves as much as you Gaff.

Indeed. The man's got a flexible back (to suck his pathetic sick self off) and flexible shoulder (for all that back-patting).

[mhgaffney]

Any case sounds convincing when you only present one side of it.

Yes.

And as I showed at the top of this thread -- this is exactly what the FBI and 9/11 Commission did.

So, why do you trash me? Where is your outrage -- that these official bodies lied to you?

Are you on auto pilot? Asleep? Too numb to react -- or maybe dumbed down to the point of being semi comatose -- like so many of our fellow Americans?

[mhgaffney]

My email exchange with Mark Roberts was nothing special -- and if he told Lone Bolt otherwise -- then Roberts lied.

In that exchange -- Roberts regurgitated his mantra that NIST got it right -- with me challenging him to actually read the NIST report -- which I am pretty certain he never did. He probably read the executive summary -- which is a gloss. Big deal.

I went into that exchange open to his views -- but he soon convinced me he was incapable of any sort of critical thinking. Apart from one minor detail -- which I don't even remember -- his feedback influenced my thinking not at all.

As he himself admits -- he never even read my NIST paper. This says it all.

THIS present thread is about issues pertaining to the paper posted at the top -- It is not about MHGaffney - nor is it about Mark Roberts.

I am entirely absent from my writing about 9/11. Of course - I understand why some of you want to make me the issue. But it won't fly.

Attacking the messenger is an old story. It's as old as the hills. That's what happened to the prophet Jeremiah -- when he tried to warn his countrymen. And the same thing happened more recently to Mordechai Vanunu.

People who talk truth to power come under attack. That's how it is. 9/11 is no different.

[SoCalBronco]

My email exchange with Mark Roberts was nothing special -- and if he told Lone Bolt otherwise -- then Roberts lied.



Surely then, you would have no problem consenting to Lone Bolt posting the exchange, would you?

Clearly, if you are being truthful, this would only have the effect of confirming the outline of the discussion that you posted. Why would the great Gaff be so afraid to agree to letting us see what was said?

Why don't you sack up, Gaff? Give your permission to let the discussion be posted for all to see. Lone Bolt has only asked you this question about 5 times.

Why are you artfully dodging it, Gaff?

The ball is in your court. Sack up or STFU and STFD.

[mhgaffney]

You are free to do that.

Start your own thread.

[mhgaffney]

One of our biggest obstacles today is the two second attention span of most Americans.

You clowns are classic examples -- You have been so dumbed down for so long you don't know how to focus.

Well this thread is about learning how to focus.

I don't intend to for this thread to be hijacked by people who are in denial and who'd who'd rather fly away -- from the facts at hand -- rather than deal with them.

So -- deal with it. Deal with the fact you were deceived. By the FBI and 9/11 Commission. Deal with this!

Face reality for once in your lives.

[W*GS]

Face reality for once in your lives.

Thanks for the laugher, asshole.

[DenverBrit]

One of our biggest obstacles today is the two second attention span of most Americans.

You clowns are classic examples -- You have been so dumbed down for so long you don't know how to focus.

Well this thread is about learning how to focus.

I don't intend to for this thread to be hijacked by people who are in denial and who'd who'd rather fly away -- from the facts at hand -- rather than deal with them.

So -- deal with it. Deal with the fact you were deceived. By the FBI and 9/11 Commission. Deal with this!

Face reality for once in your lives.

No, it's about you coming down off the 'mountain' to enlighten us peasants with news that only Gaffney can deliver.
You are the misunderstood messenger, the one who mentions himself in the same breath as the prophet Jeremiah. Wacko!! :loopy:

Gaffney, you're a sick, self congratulating poser who now thinks of himself as a misunderstood prophet.
For Christ's sake, get help and stop posting your half arsed theories just so you can be a condescending, little pr*ck.

[SoCalBronco]

No, it's about you coming down off the 'mountain' to enlighten us peasants with news that only Gaffney can deliver.
You are the misunderstood messenger, the one who mentions himself in the same breath as the prophet Jeremiah. Wacko!! :loopy:

Gaffney, you're a sick, self congratulating poser

Gaff is a great guy, just ask him.

[theAPAOps5]

Make the world a better place punch this disgusting piece of waste Gaffney in the face!

You sir are a waste of existence.

[The Lone Bolt]

One of our biggest obstacles today is the two second attention span of most Americans.

You clowns are classic examples -- You have been so dumbed down for so long you don't know how to focus.

Well this thread is about learning how to focus.

I don't intend to for this thread to be hijacked by people who are in denial and who'd who'd rather fly away -- from the facts at hand -- rather than deal with them.

So -- deal with it. Deal with the fact you were deceived. By the FBI and 9/11 Commission. Deal with this!

Face reality for once in your lives.

I think we are focusing just fine Gaff. I personally are focusing on the fact that you claim that Roberts proved you wrong on only a "minor detail" and that you never called him a "disinfo agent" and yet you are working feverishly to avoid the simple act of giving consent for him to post an e-mail exchange that could verify or disprove your claims.

It's you who are changing the subject Gaff. Why? What are you afraid of?

All we are getting from you on this subject is excuse after excuse. You are now claiming that you don't want this thread to be "hijacked" by this issue. Fine. I have a solution. Give your consent and I will post it on an entirely new thread. Problem solved.

Now what's your excuse?hmmm...

[mhgaffney]

The only thing I have done feverishly is prod you clowns to face the reality posted at the top of this thread.

That is the short and long of it.

There is no mention of me in the article. It is not about Gaffney. It was never about Gaffney.

You try to make Gaffney the issue -- simply because you are escapists.

And you especially, Lone Bolt, should know better. You are -- or pretend to be -- a therapist.

As I noted before -- if this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the people who come to you for help.

[PaintballCLE]

The only thing I have done feverishly is prod you clowns to face the reality posted at the top of this thread.

That is the short and long of it.

There is no mention of me in the article. It is not about Gaffney. It was never about Gaffney.

You try to make Gaffney the issue -- simply because you are escapists.

And you especially, Lone Bolt, should know better. You are -- or pretend to be -- a therapist.

As I noted before -- if this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the people who come to you for help.

So who shot JFK from the grassy knoll?

[24champ]

The only thing I have done feverishly is prod you clowns to face the reality posted at the top of this thread.

That is the short and long of it.

There is no mention of me in the article. It is not about Gaffney. It was never about Gaffney.

You try to make Gaffney the issue -- simply because you are escapists.

And you especially, Lone Bolt, should know better. You are -- or pretend to be -- a therapist.

As I noted before -- if this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the people who come to you for help.

Quit ****ing around Gaffo. Why not let Lone Bolt post the e-mail exchange?

Never mind, we already have an idea what's in those emails... it will blow your little sick theories to hell. That's why your avoiding the question. You sick ****.

[DenverBrit]

The only thing I have done feverishly is prod you clowns to face the reality posted at the top of this thread.

That is the short and long of it.

There is no mention of me in the article. It is not about Gaffney. It was never about Gaffney.

You try to make Gaffney the issue -- simply because you are escapists.

And you especially, Lone Bolt, should know better. You are -- or pretend to be -- a therapist.

As I noted before -- if this is how you think out of the box -- I pity the people who come to you for help.


No, it's never about Gaffney.......Gaffney just writes articles then points to them as evidence that Gaffney was right all along. :loopy:
Gaffney needs help, not more Gaffney.
And WE could all do with a lot less Gaffney!

[mhgaffney]

A lot less Gaffney -- so you can do what?

Go back to sleep!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[24champ]

A lot less Gaffney -- so you can do what?

Go back to sleep!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

Gaffo...can Lone Bolt post the emails? Yes or no. Pretty simple question.

[mhgaffney]

He is free to post whatever he wants. I do not control him, you, or anyone.

But I won't let this thread be hijacked. End of story.

You clowns are as bad as Denver's LBs last year. You whiff at the real deal -- then insist on pursuing trivia.

[mhgaffney]

Stay tuned.

Monday I will be posting another side of this issue. We may have learned how they flew those planes in the buildings -- and yes it would involve an inside connection --

[TDmvp]

Stay tuned.

Monday I will be posting another side of this issue. We may have learned how they flew those planes in the buildings -- and yes it would involve an inside connection --

http://ihasahotdog.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/loldogs-cute-puppy-pictures-riveting.jpg

[DenverBrit]

A lot less Gaffney -- so you can do what?

Go back to sleep!

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

No, so I can take off the waders!

[Hotrod]

So I hear Gaff is having a sale on his books this week.

http://www.tfehman.com/images/Horse%20Poop%20sm.jpg

[mhgaffney]

I just googled the paper at the top of this thread -- and got 7300 hits.

It is spreading like wild fire across the internet.

So far -- no one has shown any errors in the paper. I have always acknowledged errors when I made them -- and if any turn up I will acknowledge it - and make the correction.

So far, there are none.

I have received new information about Eddy Shalev and will post it soon. He appears to have left the country -- probably gone to Israel.

[DenverBrit]

I just googled the paper at the top of this thread -- and got 7300 hits.

It is spreading like wild fire across the internet.

So far -- no one has shown any errors in the paper. I have always acknowledged errors when I made them -- and if any turn up I will acknowledge it - and make the correction.

So far, there are none.

I have received new information about Eddy Shalev and will post it soon. He appears to have left the country -- probably gone to Israel.

http://farmnsanity.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/gp-manure.jpg

[Bronco Bob]

I just googled the paper at the top of this thread -- and got 7300 hits.

It is spreading like wild fire across the internet.

So far -- no one has shown any errors in the paper. I have always acknowledged errors when I made them -- and if any turn up I will acknowledge it - and make the correction.

So far, there are none.

I have received new information about Eddy Shalev and will post it soon. He appears to have left the country -- probably gone to Israel.

Simple question: If metal is heated, does it expand?

[mhgaffney]

Raw Story:

Ex-FBI Agent

Why I Support a New 9/11 Investigation

By Coleen Rowley

http://www.time.com/time/subscriber/personoftheyear/2002/poyintro.html

July 16, 2009 "Rawstory" -Tuesday, July 14th- In the absence of my being there in New York City to stand with the 9/11 families, first responders and survivors, I offer the following statement in support of your goal of a new investigation into the attacks of September 11th and the NYC CAN campaign to place it on the ballot for November.

At the time of 9-11, I had been an FBI agent for over 20 years. My main responsibilities by then were teaching criminal procedure to FBI agents and other law enforcement officers, mostly about 4th Amendment search and seizure, 5th and 6th Amendment law of interrogation, right to attorney and constitutional protection of rights to “free speech”, due process, habeas corpus, and against cruel and unusual punishment. A week before 9-11, I and the rest of the FBI’s ethics instructors were mandated (as a result of an earlier public FBI scandal) to give a one hour PowerPoint presentation, a form of remedial training on “law enforcement ethics” which I accomplished in a fairly perfunctory way, just reading the slides.

After 9-11, with the knowledge I had of the bitter internal dispute inside the FBI that was being hushed up but had kept some of our better agents from possibly uncovering more of the 9-11 plot before it happened, I couldn’t forget two of the slides in that Law Enforcement ethics curriculum: “DO NOT: Puff, Shade, Tailor, Firm up, Stretch, Massage, or Tidy up statements of fact.” And “Misplaced Loyalties: As employees of the FBI, we must be aware that our highest loyalty is to the United States Constitution. We should never sacrifice the truth in order to obtain a desired result (e.g. conviction of a defendant) or to avoid personal or institutional embarrassment.”

The official dissembling and excuse-making about the true causes and prior mistakes that gave rise to and allowed the terrorist attacks to happen, almost immediately ushered in the Bush-Cheney Administration’s egregious and lawless, post 9-11 “war on terror” agenda which bore no connection to the original causes and no connection to the goal of reducing terrorism and making the world safer. When I got a chance, about 8 ½ months after 9-11 to tell what I knew, I did so and my disclosures led to further investigation by the Department of Justice Inspector General and figured in the 9-11 Commission Report.

But it was way too late for this emerging bit of truth that has continued to leak out in dribs and drabs to have any impact. The laws themselves, especially the criminal procedure ones rooted in the Constitution that I had spent my career teaching to law enforcement, have largely gone up in smoke. Having seen the cost of remaining silent, I publicly warned, a few months after my first memo, against launching the pre-emptive invasion of Iraq. But false agendas had already filled the vacuum created by lack of truth. And we are still dealing with the disastrous consequences of these unjustified, pre-emptive wars.

Let me therefore simply repeat the request I made to the Senate Judiciary Committee in June 2002: “Foremost, we owe it to the public, especially the victims of terrorism, to be completely honest. I can only imagine what these crime and terrorism victims continue to go through. They deserve nothing but the complete, unfettered truth.”

Therefore, I fully support the 9/11 families, first responders, survivors and over 60,000 other New Yorkers who have endorsed a new 9/11 investigation in New York City as advanced by ballot referendum this coming November election.

Coleen Rowley is a former FBI staff attorney who turned whistle-blower after witnessing repeated failures within the bureau to properly investigate alleged 9/11 co-conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui. She was one of three Time Magazine Persons of the Year in 2002.


Cindy Sheehan Supports a New Investigation into the 9/11 attacks


By Cindy Sheehan
7/16/2009

http://cindysheehanssoapbox.blogspot.com/2009/07/cindy-sheehan-supports-new.html
On April 4th, 2004, my son Casey was killed serving the United States Army in Iraq during the illegal occupation started by the Bush Administration.

That illegal occupation was made possible because of the attacks that took place on September 11th, 2001, resulting in the deaths of 2,973 people.

Since that horrid day, victims' family members have been doing everything within their power to seek justice and accountability for what happened, with little to no success. It is shameful that almost 8 years after the fact, they have been denied this. The official 9/11 commission report was a sham and a mockery of justice, not justice.

Currently, there is an effort underway in New York City to get a new investigation onto the ballot by this November. The New York City Coalition for Accountability Now (www.NYCCAN.org) is currently attempting to get enough signatures to make this happen, and they need your help. I wholeheartedly support and endorse this effort.

Please do what you can to support this effort, and thank you.

[mhgaffney]

Here is the cover of Time December 22, 2002

Rowley is in the middle.

[W*GS]

gaffney, you need a new obsession.

Discover your dick.

[Requiem]

That is something he'll never find.

[mhgaffney]

This little tid bit is for W*gs and Req:

I just googled the article at the top of this thread. Guess what? 8300 hits.

Regardless of you bozos -- this info is making its way around the planet -- reaching thousands of people every hour -- many of whom still have a functioning brain -- unlike you jackals.

No errors yet, guys. You deserve to choke on it. Sometimes a near death experience can awaken the higher self --

Even W*gs has one -- tho he denies it (with the passion of the true believer).

[W*GS]

I just googled the article at the top of this thread. Guess what? 8300 hits.

BFD.

I just Googled "Michael Jackson" and got 216,000,000 hits.

You're 1/26000th of Jacko, gaffney.

[mhgaffney]

Maybe if we all focus our thoughts (and or prayers --whatever) W*gs will have a near death experience and get in touch with his higher self.

Those who have been there and done that come back transformed. They no longer waste their lives in trivial and/or materialistic pursuits.

Hate to say it -- but short of near death, W*gs is a goner.

[DenverBrit]

Maybe if we all focus our thoughts (and or prayers --whatever) W*gs will have a near death experience and get in touch with his higher self.

Those who have been there and done that come back transformed. They no longer waste their lives in trivial and/or materialistic pursuits.

Hate to say it -- but short of near death, W*gs is a goner.


Well maybe you'll have your "near death experience" too and stop wasting your life with "trivial pursuits."

Somehow I doubt it.

[W*GS]

Poor gaffney. He's got so much invested in the OM WRP board (!) that a mild slam makes him wish me near-dead.

What a pathetic spaz you are, gaffney.

Go **** your PCR doll.

[mhgaffney]

And thank you W*gs for the intellectually challenging dialogue!

You are -- as always -- a gentleman and scholar.

[W*GS]

You're neither a gentleman nor scholar, as gentlemen don't enrich themselves on the corpses of thousands, and scholars understand what they study.

You're a buffoon, and a scumbag, gaffney.

[Requiem]

Gaffney's just a ****ing joke. I'd like to play him in air hockey sometime though, just so I could smash the puck through his teeth and yelled, "Yep, a Jew did it."

[mhgaffney]

FYI, the paper at the top of this thread has 35 foot notes -- and links to all of the relevant official documents.

After several weeks -- the paper has withstood the test of readership. By now tens of thousands of people have read it -- who knows? - maybe more. Yet, no errors have come to light.

This falls under the heading of scholarship. Unfortunately, it is necessary to spell this out - since clowns like W*gs obviously do not understand the meaning of the word.

[SoCalBronco]

FYI, the paper at the top of this thread has 35 foot notes

After several weeks -- the paper has withstood the test of readership. By now tens of thousands of people have read it -- who knows? - maybe more. Yet, no errors have come to light.

This falls under the heading of scholarship.

I'd be able to rescue the Broncos from Bowlen's drunken stupor (by buying them) if I had a nickel for each time Gaff wallowed in his own self-praise and congratulation.

Gaff.....getting 3 dollars an article from some tinfoil troofer website isn't sufficient ground to rub yourself raw.

You really need to start acting your age, dude.

[W*GS]

Footnotes do not a scholar make, idiot.

[Requiem]

Yeah, Gaffney. I can do a 35 endnote sourced paper any day of the week, you banana choker.

[DenverBrit]

FYI, the paper at the top of this thread has 35 foot notes -- and links to all of the relevant official documents.

After several weeks -- the paper has withstood the test of readership. By now tens of thousands of people have read it -- who knows? - maybe more. Yet, no errors have come to light.

This falls under the heading of scholarship. Unfortunately, it is necessary to spell this out - since clowns like W*gs obviously do not understand the meaning of the word.

They couldn't squeeze Pompous, condescending, arrogant self promoting ass on the label!
But it works anyway.

http://legalbeer.com/images/stone%20arrogant%20bastard%20ale.jpg

[Northman]

They couldn't squeeze Pompous, condescending, arrogant self promoting ass on the label!
But it works anyway.

http://legalbeer.com/images/stone%20arrogant%20bastard%20ale.jpg

I had some friends visiting from out of town a couple of months ago for a metal music festival and they were drinking that beer. I had never heard of it before they came into town. I was dying from laughter. :D

[W*GS]

Here's the entirety of gaff-o's relationship to the horrors of 9/11:

[SoCalBronco]

Here's the entirety of gaff-o's relationship to the horrors of 9/11:

I just heard a sound from rural Oregon and it sounded an awful lot like "cha-ching".

[orangeatheist]

Gaffney's just a ****ing joke. I'd like to play him in air hockey sometime though, just so I could smash the puck through his teeth and yelled, "Yep, a Jew did it."

You jerk! You made me laugh out loud and now my wife knows I ducked into the den to hide from doing yard work!

[orangeatheist]

Yeah, Gaffney. I can do a 35 endnote sourced paper any day of the week, you banana choker.

That did it! Now the KIDS know where I am!

[mhgaffney]

What a bunch of chicken hearts!

They attack me -- the messenger -- to avoid dealing with the message.

It won't work, you bozos. You are losing the debate.

[W*GS]

You are losing the debate.

I'll concede that you're a master 'bater.

[SoCalBronco]

I'll concede that you're a master 'bater.

Given Gaff's unending self-promotion and self-praise, I wouldn't be surprised if he masturbated to a picture of himself. I really wouldn't.

[mhgaffney]

Check out this paper posted by the Journal of 9/11 Studies, last year.

Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems

Aidan Monaghan (B.Sc., EET)

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/AutopilotSystemsMonaghan.pdf

If this research is correct -- then the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) studies of the final approach of AA 77 and U 093 are not reliable because the FDR data for these planes was never authenticated -- which is a standard practice. The data from both FDRs is therefor suspect.

Moreover, because the FDRs from United 175 and AA 11 were never found in the WTC ruins (so we were told) -- NTSB never explained either of those crashes.

Most importantly, however, this is the first paper I haver seen that offers a plausible scenario how the planes could have hit the buildings. New augmented GPS technology evidently had been introduced in the 1-2 years before 9/11 --which could explain the impacts.

From what we know-- it is safe to conclude that the alleged hijackers did not have the skills to

1. manually fly the planes into the buildings, nor

2. to manually enter the necessary approach data into the Boeing auto pilots

However, if someone clandestinely up loaded the approach data into the Boeing auto pilots - the 757s and 767s could have flown themselves into the intended targets. If this paper by Aidan Monaghan is correct -- the technology already existed to do this on 9/11.

The augmented GPS system introduced in 1999-2000 was accurate to within a few meters. Curious that the system made possible a "highway corridor" about 250 feet wide -- which just happens to be the width of the WTC.

This is the most plausible theory I have seen, so far. Needless to say, it also implies that 9/11 was an inside job. Only an insider could have had access to the upload link.

If this is correct -- the alleged terrorist hijacker pilots were patsies.

MHG

[W*GS]

gaffney must be taking a break from ****ing his PCR love doll. Perhaps it got a leak and is in the shop.

[DenverBrit]

Check out this paper posted by the Journal of 9/11 Studies, last year.

Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems

Aidan Monaghan (B.Sc., EET)

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/AutopilotSystemsMonaghan.pdf

If this research is correct -- then the National Transportation and Safety Board (NTSB) studies of the final approach of AA 77 and U 093 are not reliable because the FDR data for these planes was never authenticated -- which is a standard practice. The data from both FDRs is therefor suspect.

Moreover, because the FDRs from United 175 and AA 11 were never found in the WTC ruins (so we were told) -- NTSB never explained either of those crashes.

Most importantly, however, this is the first paper I haver seen that offers a plausible scenario how the planes could have hit the buildings. New augmented GPS technology evidently had been introduced in the 1-2 years before 9/11 --which could explain the impacts.

From what we know-- it is safe to conclude that the alleged hijackers did not have the skills to

1. manually fly the planes into the buildings, nor

2. to manually enter the necessary approach data into the Boeing auto pilots

However, if someone clandestinely up loaded the approach data into the Boeing auto pilots - the 757s and 767s could have flown themselves into the intended targets. If this paper by Aidan Monaghan is correct -- the technology already existed to do this on 9/11.

The augmented GPS system introduced in 1999-2000 was accurate to within a few meters. Curious that the system made possible a "highway corridor" about 250 feet wide -- which just happens to be the width of the WTC.

This is the most plausible theory I have seen, so far. Needless to say, it also implies that 9/11 was an inside job. Only an insider could have had access to the upload link.

If this is correct -- the alleged terrorist hijacker pilots were patsies.

MHG

It's getting deep.

http://img167.imageshack.us/img167/1904/manure981941pg7aw5.jpg