Support 911Blogger


NTSB Elaborates On Absent Records Pertaining To Positively Identified 9/11 Aircraft Wreckage, Including 2 Flight Data Recorders

Within a August 11, 2008 Freedom of Information Act appeal reply from the National Transportation Safety Board, the NTSB affirms that it possesses no records pertaining to positively identified wreckage recovered from the 4 aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Such wreckage includes the Flight Data Recorders attributed by the NTSB in Factual Reports to American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93.

Dear Mr. Monaghan:

I write in response to your letter, which the Safety Board received on July 31, 2008, in which you appealed the response of the National Transportation Safety Board's FOIA Officer to your FOIA request for "copies of records revealing the process by which wreckage recovered from the aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, was positively identified as belonging to: American Airlines [flights 11 and 77], and United Airlines [flights 175 and 93]." Your request opined that the Safety Board must have utilized unique serial numbers of components from each of the four aircraft in order to identify the wreckage from each aircraft. The Safety Board's FOIA Officer responded to your original request on July 18, 2008, in which the FOIA Officer indicated that the Board did not have any records within the scope of your request.

Your appeal asserts that the Safety Board's response was erroneous. In particular, your appeal states that Safety Board records mention the four aircraft "within numerous public NTSB records," and that Safety Board employees participated in the identification, collection, and examination of the wreckage of the aircraft, such as the flight data recorders and cockpit voice recorders. In addition, you assert that, "physical examination of the wreckage in question alone, cannot provide for a satisfactory basis for the affirmative determination made by the NTSB regarding the identities of the wreckage described herein," and that you believe that identification of the wreckage must have been based on "some tangible record provided to the NTSB, as allowed for by the NTSB's Quality of Information Disseminated by the National Transportation Safety Board: Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality of Information." With regard to your last assertion, you quote from the Safety Board's statement concerning information quality, which is available on the Board's website.

I have carefully reviewed your appeal of the Safety Board's response to your FOIA request, and determined that the Board must deny your appeal. The Safety Board performed an adequate, reasonable search for any records within the scope of your request, in accordance with the provisions of the FOIA, and did not locate any records within the scope of your request. Oglesby v. Dep't of the Army, 920 F.2d 57, 68 (D.C. Cir. 1990); see also Campbell v. Dep't of Justice, 164 F.3d 20, 27 (D.c. Cir. 1998). The Safety Board does not have any records that "[reveal] the process by which wreckage was recovered from the aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001." As you probably know, the Safety Board assisted the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the FBI investigated the circumstances under which the four aircraft crashed, pursuant to Congress's direction requiring the Board to relinquish its investigative priority to the FBI when the Safety Board and FBI determine that an intentional criminal act likely caused the accident at issue. 49 U.s.c. § 113 1(a)(2)(B). As such, the Safety Board did not ensure that the owners of the aircraft completed wreckage release forms, as the Board typically does in investigations in which the Board has priority. See 49 C.F.R. § 831. 12(b). Overall, the Safety Board does not have any records that describe the "process" by which the Board or the FBI identified wreckage.

To the extent that you seek to inform the Safety Board of an error in its reports under Section 515 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Public Law 106-554; H.R. 5658), and pursuant to government-wide guidelines issued by the Office of Management and Budget to assure the quality of information that Federal Agencies disseminate, as described at 67 Fed. Reg. 8,452 (Feb. 22, 2002), submitting a FOIA appeal is not the appropriate mechanism. As described in the Board's Information Quality Guidelines, which, as you know, are listed on the Board's website at http://www.ntsb.gov/info/quality.htm. you must submit a request to Executive Secretariat/Information Quality, and include the following information:

1. Your name, telephone number, address and/or e-mail address;
2. Description and documentation as to how information is to be corrected, revised, or reviewed;
3. Explanation of how person submitting the request is affected by any information error;
4. Explanation of how the disseminated information failed the quality standards; and
5. Any pertinent attachments.

Based on the foregoing, I have determined that your appeal must be denied. This response constitutes the final action from the National Transportation Safety Board on your appeal. The Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552, provides for judicial review of this determination.

Additional reading:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/16089

So, in other words, the positive identifications of the planes

are based upon the words of the FBI & Dick Cheney!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider mass emailing truth messages. More info here: http://www.911blogger.com/node/13321

Request For Correction Reply From NTSB Due 8/23/2008

Based on my understanding of the NTSB's Quality of Information guidelines, it seems there should be records available that serve as the basis for NTSB opinions.

Here are the search terms utilized by the FBI during their unsuccessful search for resonsive records pertaining to my complaint, contained within a "Declaration" offered by the Section Chief of the records section (will post next week after oral arguments).

Records that should have been located were the FAA and airline records for each aircraft that were presumably seized by the FBI. For example, the FBI turned over to Judicial Watch the Sheraton Hotel and CITGO videos after being sued, if I'm not mistaken.

A search of the CRS was conducted using the following subjects:

"Airline Debris," "Debris Identification," "Commercial Aircraft," "Aircraft Identification," "Aircraft Debris," Aircraft Wreckage," "Aircraft," "Recovered Debris," "National Transportation and Safety Bureau," "National Transportation Safety Board," "NTSB," "American Airlines," "American Airlines Flight," "American Airlines Flight Eleven," "American Airlines Flight Number 11," "American Airlines Flight 77," "N334AA," "N612UA," "N644AA," "N591 UA," "Flight 175," "Flight 11," "Flight 77," "Flight 93," "Identifying Aircraft Parts," "Factual Report Aviation," "Federal Aviation Administration," "Pentbomb," "Ground Zero," "Freshkills Landfill," and "Fresh Kills Landfill."

Despite this extensive and detailed search effort, RlDS has been unable to locate any FBI records responsive to plaintiffs request.

Can one conclude

from the above that the NTSB did not positively identify any aircraft wreckage claimed to have been associated with the events of 9-11? Is this an admission on their part?

NTSB Seems To Have Taken The FBIs Word, So To Speak

The central problem for me is the FDRs. The ASCE PBPS reports a trajectory for AA 77 that allows for it to topple light posts in front of the Pentagon. Yet the FDR for AA 77 places the plane hundreds of feet to the north of the downed light posts. Additionally, the NTSB FDR reports do not contain FDR serial numbers. Moreover, the FDR data download file contains a timestamp that was generated 4 hours before the FDR was recovered.

The FDR data suggests normal piloting activity. I suspect the 9/11 planes were under hot-wired autopilot control using GPS precision guidance.

In my opinion, the FDRs are very suspect and are key to the official story.

I think they are trying to hint

that you should be asking the FBI................ as if you could.

I think you are right

I think someone is sending a slight hint out there

wow

I mean, just... wow.

NTSB Managing Director appeal response

Very deft writing which skates past much of the intent and spirit of the request and appeal and sticks to literal response.

Look at the bounds within which this response and the appeal denial are made. First, they are literally replying to Aidan's request for information on the "process of aircraft wreckage was recovered and recorded".

"The Safety Board does not have any records that "[reveal] the process by which wreckage was recovered from the aircraft used during the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001."

"As such, the Safety Board did not ensure that the owners of the aircraft completed wreckage release forms, as the Board typically does in investigations in which the Board has priority. See 49 C.F.R. § 831. 12(b). Overall, the Safety Board does not have any records that describe the "process" by which the Board or the FBI identified wreckage."

If they are sticking literally to replying about "process", this appeal denial doesn't necessarily mean that they do not have wreckage, or information about the wreckage. The only reference to wreckage or information about the wreckage is the NTSB quoting Aidan's assertions that to identify the planes, the NTSB must have had the wreckage.

To the extent they did search for records (again note the "within the scope of your request" eg about process of wreckage identification and not necessarily about the wreckage or knowledge thereof) is tightly bounded, this time within parameters defined by previous judicial decisions that appear at face to regard challenges to the NTSB's definition of "adequate, resonable search".

"The Safety Board performed an adequate, reasonable search for any records within the scope of your request, in accordance with the provisions of the FOIA, and did not locate any records within the scope of your request. Oglesby v. Dep't of the Army, 920 F.2d 57, 68 (D.C. Cir. 1990); see also Campbell v. Dep't of Justice, 164 F.3d 20, 27 (D.c. Cir. 1998)."

All in all, though, these FOIA requsts and responses are brilliant in their revelations, however subtle they may be. The thing that really jumps out at me each time I read these responses is that given the enormous impact 9/11 has had on our worlds, believe the official story or not, one might thnk that official agencies would be more forthcoming, the people responding feeling some sense of humanity, to share information about this terrible, tragic day.

Anyways, once again, thank you Aidan for your perseverance and attention to these FOIA's! Rep, there has been quite a few of these from Aidan by now, wonder if they could be packed up into a sticky thread or link on sidebar, or somehow brought together.?

Thanks to Aidan........

....the NTSB is now on record and has admitted it is guilty of gross negligence or a cover-up. Four times in this letter NTSB states it has no records of any physical examination of airplane wreckage. If NSTB has no records, then one of the following has to be true:

1) They didn't examine any of the wreckage
2) They examined it, but didn't document their work
3) They examined it, documented it and will employ every possible loop hole not to reveal their findings vis-a-vis the FOIA process

Since they go out of their way to cite specific federal regulations and court challenges to FOIA requests, one might assume that #3 is the right answer.

However, we can't assume, so we must take their response at face value, which means the questions are now: "Why didn't NTSB examine the physical evidence from any of the four crashes?" or "Why didn't NTSB keep records of their investigation of the physical evidence?"

These are some simple questions that now need to be asked. NTSB is very explicit that they have their asses covered within the FOIA process and have told Aidan to go find another "mechanism." OK, let's do it, because it is obvious that Aidan has hit a nerve and they are on the run.

..

" As you probably know, the Safety Board assisted the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as the FBI investigated the circumstances under which the four aircraft crashed, pursuant to Congress's direction requiring the Board to relinquish its investigative priority to the FBI when the Safety Board and FBI determine that an intentional criminal act likely caused the accident at issue. 49 U.s.c. § 113 1(a)(2)(B). As such, the Safety Board did not ensure that the owners of the aircraft completed wreckage release forms, as the Board typically does in investigations in which the Board has priority. See 49 C.F.R. § 831. 12(b). Overall, the Safety Board does not have any records that describe the "process" by which the Board or the FBI identified wreckage."

At what point was it determined by both the FBI and Safety Board that an intentional criminal act had taken place? When they found the red bandanna?

Another angle

You can still get them for bad "quality" info:

http://911blogger.com/node/11969

Ask them why Flight 175 originated at BOSTON HELIPORT and not Logan airport?

And why Flight 11 originated nowhere.

70 Disturbing Facts About 9/11

John Doraemi publishes Crimes of the State Blog
http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com/

johndoraemi --at-- yahoo.com.

Aidan Monaghan - upcoming interview

Aidan Monaghan will discuss this with Kevin Barrett this Monday,
August 18th, 5-6 p.m. Central: http://www.gcnlive.com Network 4

49 U.S.C. s 1131(1)(a)(2)(C)

(C) If a Federal law enforcement agency suspects and notifies the
Board that an accident being investigated by the Board under
subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) may have been caused
by an intentional criminal act, the Board, in consultation with the law
enforcement agency, shall take necessary actions to ensure that evidence
of the criminal act is preserved.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&doc...

49 U.S.C. s 1131(1)(a)(2)(C)

(C) If a Federal law enforcement agency suspects and notifies the
Board that an accident being investigated by the Board under
subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) may have been caused
by an intentional criminal act, the Board, in consultation with the law
enforcement agency, shall take necessary actions to ensure that evidence
of the criminal act is preserved.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=browse_usc&doc...