I was born with physical eyes, a brain and a conscious mind. While the eyes have always been better than 20/20, both the brain and the conscious mind took time to develop. That development came through experience, training, education, parenting - but equally as important, environment. I grew up in an environment where you accepted reality for what it was and you QUESTIONED EVERYTHING around you. Not because you had a "conspiracy theory" or because others around were not able to see clearly, but because questions lead to correct understanding and without questions, humanity will never learn anything from its past, nor ever progress forward.
So, the real question here is this: Have you objectively and without bias, ever truly questioned and conducted your own personal investigation into the evidence of the official story revolving around Shanksville? That's the real question on the table for every Citizen of the United States of America.
I will:
A) Continue to ask the common sense obvious questions that are of a technical nature and are the inescapable causation of Shanksville and 911 in specific.
B) Continue to randomly talk with people in public places whenever and wherever I can, about whether or not they have objectively and without bias truly conducted their own private investigation into the official story of September 11th, 2001.
C) Continue to share with people my understanding and background in aviation and aerospace science (formal education and professional experience), so that they understand that they have a reliable source of information and expertise on the subject matter when they have truly honest questions about the weapons used on 911.
D) Hope and Pray that someday this nations puts someone in the White House (and I voted for Obama) who has the courage and the intestinal fortitude to make the Executive Decision to call for a truly open investigation to the alleged facts of 911, while making the process as open to the public as possible.
Education is the key. Without education The People have not so much as a snow balls chance of truly understanding what took place on September 11th, 2001. It is not Rocket Science. I know Rocket Science. I've worked in Rocket Science. I understand Rocket Science. 911, is not Rocket Science. However, it does take an understanding of the weapons that were used AND the residual signature that using such weapons MUST (by logical and physical extension) leave behind in their wake. When I look at 911, having a background that guides me on the subject matter, I DO NOT SEE anywhere near the level or degree of sufficiency with respect to the residual nature of the weapons alleged to have been used on 911.
Could I be flat out wrong? Yes. There is the possibility that I and the many other experienced high-performance jet pilots, aeronautical engineers, aviation professionals, etc, could be flat out wrong when we say that there were no Boeing 757's at either the Pentagon or Shanksville. We could be wrong. We could be highly mistaken. However, the evidence that we have seen thus far, that which the government has allowed us to examine, does not indicate that commercial aircraft of the 75 type or category were used either at the Pentagon or at Shanksville. The physical evidence that one having intimate knowledge on the subject, demonstrates that something other than a Boeing 757 struck on 911. What that object was, I am not 100% certain.
When you throw an apple against a cement wall at close range, you get apple splatter. When you fire an H&K USP 45, you get recoil. When you roll a Boeing 757 weighing nearly 200,000lbs (carrying a sufficient fuel load) over on its back at speeds in excess of 435kts and you set an angle of attack at nearly 40-degree negative and you slam that aircraft into flat/level terrain, you get L-AOA geometry debris field, higher degrees of component recovery and higher potential for damage caused by fire (as just a few signatures of such a crash site).
When you tell me that in the aftermath, one of the engines bounced high into the air and landing in a nearby body of water and you NEVER allow me to inspect that engine, but you do allow photos to be released of an engine that penetrated the earth and was recovered showing obvious signs of having gone through Redox and that has a diameter that does not even come close to the diameter of the engine that I know (and love) so well - then you have just done something that clearly raises my eyebrows - both of them.
I am very familiar with the Rolls Royce Trent class of turbine powerplants, including the latest RB211-535 derivatives. I have flown the 75 as an adult. I have refueled the 75 as a school kid. I love the 75 almost until it hurts. I know this aircraft - intimately. I know what she is capable of doing and I've got a good sense of what she is not capable of doing.
The 75, is what a seven passenger Ferrari Sports Utility Vehicle would be, if Ferrari decided to make one. It is a commercial jet on steroids and anyone having operated her will tell you that without qualification. She is simply amazing. Do I love that aircraft? Obviously.
