When I described the BTS database as having been fixed that wasn’t totally accurate.
It has been altered, but not enough to provide the evidence necessary to show that these flights ever existed.
When the database was examined in 2003 it contained no record whatsoever of either flight11 or flight 77.
That database has been backed up, as it was envisaged that it would be altered.
Then ten months later it was found that the flights had been added to the database as scheduled, but that there was no flight data for them.
And the tail numbers have not been added.
The flight data is recorded in real time as the planes fly, and would be almost as difficult to fake as pictures of stars from the moon, for similar reasons of complexity.
“No flight data” shows that the planes never flew.
The summary statistics for the day were also not altered to include these flights.
So even after the database has been altered, it still provides ABSOLUTE PROOF that Both AA flights 11 and 77 never flew that day.
According to the database, the flights didn’t take off.
So any individual who says that those flights flew is going directly against the evidence of the BTS database!
So how does the hijacking story fit in with that?
911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news, posts in the blogs section are the responsibility of the poster, readers are encouraged to check the facts and form their own conclusions.
06 December 2006
When I described the BTS database as having been fixed that wasn’t totally accurate.
[Comment from CB_Brooklyn: 11 and 77 are numbers used in numerology. See here]
9/11 TV-Fakery... Hunt the Boeing (WTC) 2: Pythagoras Exposes Phantom Flight UA175 as a Hoax (Analysis by StillDiggin)
It appears that the newer source of the "Jim Friedl" audio has more to offer than meets the ear. In this newly released video, we are presented with an uninterrupted “live” video feed, which provides us with a reverse version of the magic trick "Now you see it... Now you don't."
At 7:38 of this video, the feed is switched to a different helicopter. A few seconds later, FOX commentator Jim Ryan describes the image from the video feed as "the picture from our chopper now arriving at the scene." This comment seems to validate that this is indeed the same video that was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, since the picture correlates with the commentary. In what I referred to in my previous article as the "original source," the video feed never switches to this helicopter (this would have occurred approximately 2:44 into that video).
Although this matching commentary does not necessarily prove that this newly released video is exactly what was broadcast “live” by WNYW FOX5 on 9/11/01, it does seem to prove that this is the feed that Jim Ryan was looking at as he was commentating
Seeing the following quote on RawStory prompted me to make this blog.
"Just 34% of Americans say that they support the war; 70% of women opposed."
The information below may help put in context, what is going on:
Thoughts on How to Respond When asked "Why hasn't one media outlet covered the evidence?" (Excellent for MSM spots)
When asked "Why hasn't one media outlet covered the evidence?"
Respond something like this...
The media is hiding the truth of 9/11 and I can prove it:
- This past May, a national Zogby poll revealed that half of the country wants a new investigation into 9/11. Why didn't the media report this? When half the country wants a new investigation into the biggest terrorist attack in its history, all the news channels should have had breaking-news flashing on the screen. Why didn't they? Is Michael Jackson and runaway brides more important?
- The family members of victims held a press conference on September 11, 2006 at the National Press Club in Washington DC demanding a new investigation into the attacks of September 11th. The mainstream media failed to report this. Why? Doesn't the media side with the victims' families?
- At Ground Zero on this past 9/11 anniversary were 3000 people wearing black t-shirts reading "investigate 9/11". Where was your coverage on that?
A peer-review of Steven E. Jones' 9/11 Research
by Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood
Added several images, further proving that molten aluminum does not retain a silvery color when elevated to higher temperatures. This contradicts Professor Steven Jones' research, which makes the (false) assumption that aluminum would be silvery at ~1500° C simply because it's silvery at ~600° C.
Highly recommended reading
Is the Media REALLY Involved in the 9/11 Attacks?
It is the duty of the press and TV networks to report the news to the public. It is their job, their responsibility.
What does it tell us when certain stories are withheld? What does it tell us when CNN/FOX/et al report on nothing but Michael Jackson, Scott Peterson, Terri Schiavo, and runaway brides, for hours on end? Surely there are more important issues to discuss. What are they hiding?
The mainstream media are part of the 9/11 cover-up and therefore complicit in the attacks. If they weren’t, they would have reported on this May 2006 Zogby poll revealing that about half of America wants a new investigation, including the investigation of government officials for possible involvement.
September 2005 - September 2006
A disinfo agent can be described as someone who...
- discourages others from looking at information
- encourages others to make assumptions instead of examining evidence
These people are causing great harm to the Truth Movement and are a very bad influence to newbies.
What Pulverized the South Tower's Concrete to Ultra-Fine Powder?
Was it a Nuclear Explosion, like this test in the Nevada Desert?
What Turned the North Tower's Spire into Steel Dust?
Here's a CNN Video of the spire AND what looks like the entire steel core turning to DUST!
What's wrong with these? They don't look right
[dz: this thread has been locked. users who wish to argue further over this subject matter are welcome to find a forum to do so on. users who continue to use this site only as a method to argue over personal opinions will find their posts removed, and will be banned.]
Former American Military Analyst Employed by the RAND Corporation
Well Known for Leaking the “Pentagon Papers” During Vietnam War
"…we’re slipping toward, uh, in the direction of a police state, without a lot of resistance, which is what happened in Germany…"
Interviewer: “…have you had a chance to look at a lot of this information coming from America’s leading scholars, physicists, engineers, etc. who have taken a look now at 9-11 and are now not only questioning what might have happened on 9-11, but really being very direct…”
Ellsberg: “I have looked at a lot of that and I tell you, without going into it all, which would take a lot of time, I find some of it very implausible and other parts of it, quite solid. There’s no question in my mind, that there is enough evidence there to justify a very comprehensive and hard hitting investigation of a kind that we have not seen, with subpoenas, and general questioning of people, and release of a lot of documents. There’s no question that, uh… put it this way, that very serious questions have been raised about how much they knew beforehand and how much involvement there may have been. Is the administration capable, uh, humanly and psychologically, of engineering such a provocation? Yes. I would say that, I worked for such an administration myself... Johnson. President Johnson put destroyers in harm’s way in the Tonkin Gulf, not only once, but several times, with a lot of his people hoping that that would lead to a confrontation, and claiming that it had, and could have resulted in the loss of many lives in the course of it...”
1. News of Steven Jones on paid leave and his thermate findings go MSM
2. Millions and millions of Americans contact the media, the government, and BYU demanding that Jones be allowed to release his so-called evidence
3. Jones' evidence is released
4. Jones is then completely discredited by the MSM based on:
- thermate findings ("arson investigation") not collected in a manner admissible in a court of law (i.e. no proof of authenticity)
- his paper is reviewed by hundreds of thousands of scientists and found to be inaccurate and deceitful
5. Next false flag attack in the US, as per Ray McGovern's and Alex Jones' predictions
6. Government blames and attacks Iran
7. Martial Law declared in the US
a few excerpts:
Jones neglects laws of physics and physical evidence regarding impossible WTC big plane crashes in favor of curt dismissal of the no-big-boeing-theory (NBB). He relies on "soft" evidence like videos, eyewitnesses, planted evidence and unverified black boxes. When others challenge how aluminum wide-body Boeings can fly through steel-concrete walls, floors and core without losing a part, Jones does not turn to physics for refutation but continues to cite eyewitnesses and videos, thereby backing the OGCT.
As a former major supporter of Steven Jones I must convey the following
Steven Jones spends much of his time on molten metal, in particular the molten metal dripping from the South Tower. Using a picture from the NIST report, he determines the color of the molten metal in order to gauge the temperature. However, the NIST report states that the “intensity levels” of the picture were adjusted. This information was placed at the bottom of the picture, but for some reason Jones removed it.
Why did Jones use a picture that had its intensity level adjusted to determine the color or something?
Why did he hide the fact that the levels were adjusted?
Was the dripping molten metal really there? Notice that the windows switch.
Former British Intelligence MI5 David Shayler comes forward about "no planes" at the WTC Get a feel of who Shayler is with these videos from earlier this year: //video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5403286136814574974 //video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2953150409490347185
Just like controlled demolitions, CGI is already fact given that...
an aluminum airplane will not slice through 100s of feet of structural steel and reinforced concrete, not show any signs of crushing, breaking, bending, and have it's delicate nose pop out the otherside. And on top of that, not have an exit hole in the building.
Also, different flight paths prove TV Fakery as well.
People must know that this technology exists and is in the hands of TV Networks, and that improvements are being made all the time.
Any news, even live news, from Iraq could all be fake!
"The video is phony because airliners don’t meld into steel and concrete buildings, they crash against them!"
in regards to this article
I ask that you follow Alex Jones' advice and look at the data.
What you see on the film footage is a CGI fuselage, a "special effect".
This video shows what happens when an F4 slams into a concrete wall at 500MPH. Note that F4s are built to much higher standards than wide-body aircraft, and are designed to fly 1500MPH. You'll see the F4 pulverizes into dust.
What happens on 9/11? The flimsy wide-body "airplane" penetrates the structural steel / concrete building just as it glides through the air! Wing tips don't break off, tail doesn't bend, the "plane" doesn't even change direction. It shows no change at all.
Update on our Debate with Steven E. Jones
Shocking election-theft testimony
Vote-rigging software written for Republican...
Computer programmer Clinton Eugene Curtis testifies under oath before the U.S. House Judiciary Members in Ohio (back in 2004)
The fake "War on Terror" is being driven by public opinion it seems. Whenever the mainstream media televises their propaganda events from the Middle East, Americans seem to stand behind it.
We have no proof that any of these "videos" are of real events...
People need to understand that ANY video - EVEN LIVE VIDEO - can be fake. This article from Technology Review explains all the details about realtime, live, on-the-fly video manipulation, deleting/editing/inserting prerecorded footage into live feed as it's happening.
...a list of many former insiders speaking up, along with specific quotes, mp3/video links, and articles.
Take a look
A good way of waking up newspapers - let's them know who's speaking up!
This article explains...
"It will soon be five years since the tragic events of 9/11/01 unfolded, and still the general public has seen no physical evidence that should have been collected at each of the four crash sites, (a routine requirement during mandatory investigations of each and every major aircraft crash.) The National Transportation Safety Board has announced on its website that responsibility for the investigations and reports have been assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but there is no indication that mandatory investigations were ever conducted or that the reports of any investigations have been written."
Here's a video of a controlled crash to demonstrate how fragile planes really are: //video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1556575484235720126&q=airplane+crash&hl=en South Tower super slow-mo for comparison: http://webfairy.911review.org/video/ghostplane2.wmv
Picture of North Tower (formerly mislabled as South Tower) "plane" impact. Notice the right wing tip? Aluminum through structural steel???
We should take advantage of this. How about a campaign to inform military bases, families, etc that Bush has admitted NO connection between Iraq and 9/11?