re: Shanksville: THE Smoking Gun & THE Litmus Test [W:348]
Here is the problem with what you say. It assumes that there is some other story with or without pat answers.
Once again, I have remained consistent for the past 13 years. I have always stated that I do not have a Theory Of Events. I have always maintained that I have Unanswered Questions of a technical nature. I have listed those questions on this and other political forum websites over the years and NO ONE has ever bothered to answer them directly. Those questions involve:
- Chemistry
- Physics
- Commercial Aircraft Engineering & Design Protocols
- Commercial Aircraft Flight Performance
- Commercial Aircraft Limit Dynamics
- Pilot Skill & Qualifications
- Commercial Building Construction
- Air Traffic Control Protocols
- US. Air Defense Protocols
- Airport Security Protocols (prior to 911)
- Commercial Aircraft Crash Site Investigation Protocols
- Commercial Aircraft Crash Site Geometry
- Commercial Aircraft Crash Site Physics
- Commercial Aircraft Avionics
- Commercial Aircraft Flight Control Systems
- Commercial Aircraft Inertial Navigation Systems
- Commercial Aircraft Flight Data Recorders
- Cell Phone Network Relay Systems
There is no "theory" here. There are a huge number of unanswered questions of a technical nature that nothing the government has ever produced even attempts to come close to answering head-on. In fact, the government has done nothing but run and hid from the serious questions surrounding the above subjects.
You still don't get the point being made. You believe what the government has told you - merely because it came from the government and not because what the government has said squares with the subjects listed above. The truth is that precious little of what you have been told is the "truth," actually squares with the myriad of subjects derived from the list above. Merely because you have been told what to think, does not mean that what you think is the truth - it simply means that you have been told it was the truth. So, you cling to it and never seriously question it. Why? Because, heretofore, you have not truly known what questions to ask.
The reason you don't know what questions to ask, is because you do not yet understand the instruments involved in making 911 happen. The weapons used were Commercial Aircraft. You desperately need to understand what that means. Every weapon deployed will always leave a Weapons Signature in its wake. If you cannot identify the weapon's signature, then you have solid ground to question the use of that weapon as the causation for the effect you have been told to believe.
When I look at 911, I DO NOT see the signature of the weapon that I was told was used to create the effect of cause. We live in a cause and effect universe - there can be no effect without a first cause, first premise. I am focusing on Flight 93 in this thread because it is one of the hottest smoking guns on planet earth - bar none. And, it is the total lack of weapons signature at the crash site that proves it is the biggest smoking gun in 911. There are several others, but this thread focuses on Flight 93.
Now, let's get back to the ground-zero issues:
- Can you impeach the testimony of the first responder Mayor and his brother-in-law?
- Can you explain the lack of physical evidence that a Boeing 757-222 impacted Shanksville?
- Can you explain why the crash site geometry at Shanksville, in no way matches angle of attack and speed last reported by Flight 93 just before impact?
- Can you explain the lack of human remains at the Shanksville crash site?
- Can you explain the lack of discovery in the high survivability components of a Boeing 757-2XX series aircraft at Shanksville?
- Can you explain how the engine components recovered from the crash site at Shanksville, managed to enter the Redox Reaction process just hours after impact?
- Can you explain how the engine components recovered from the crash site at Shanksville, do not match that of the Rolls Royce RB211-535 type?
- Can you explain why the NTSB was officially removed as the Lead Investigator by the Department of Defense and the FBI at the Shanksville crash site?
I'm not going to harp on this next issue too much, but being someone who flew quite a bit X-country in the U.S., and one who flew this particular flight on several occasions in the past back to SFO, I can't help but shake my head at the Load Factor relationships on September 11th, 2001. At that time, the average LF was ranging between 73% to 78% across the board. Yet, the LF for all four (4) aircraft allegedly involved in 911, was not just lower, but way lower for Coast-to-Coast flights. Flight 93, ran a Load Factor of 20% for that flight and that includes the four (4) alleged skyjackers. If you remove them from the calculation, the Flight 93 LF drops to a whopping 18% - again, for a Coast-to-Coast flight. Most airlines shoot for the highest LF on such flight profiles given the fuel costs involved.
It would be one thing of just one of the four (4) aircraft allegedly involved in 911 had such paltry numbers, but it does raise at least my eyebrows that the timing of 911, saw all four aircraft with such low LF profiles - simultaneously. Again, I won't ask anyone to explain that because I have been on continental flights myself that were rather thin. However, the month of September is a rather busy travel season for the airlines and Coast-to-Coast flight, especially those in the early morning, are typically packed and people are continuously being bumped and bribed with coupons, sky miles and hotel offers, because the airlines routinely overbook during that time frame. Again, I won't harp, but ALL four aircraft having such paltry LF numbers at precisely the same time does raise hair on the back of my neck - given what took place on 911.
Ok, you now have some homework to do and I await your intelligent reply.
