PDA

View Full Version : 9/11 Aircraft Parts As A Clue To Their Identity



Gold9472
09-20-2005, 08:49 PM
9/11 aircraft parts as a clue to their identity

http://www.tehrantimes.com/Description.asp?Da=9/21/2005&Cat=14&Num=001

By George Nelson
9/21/2005

The precautionary principle is based on the fact that the failure to prove a proposition completely does not disprove the proposition. If the proposition warns of an ongoing or oncoming disaster (e.g. global warming) it is wise to take precautions.

The proposition arrived at here is this: the 911 hijackings and damage to buildings were not the work of Arab terrorists, but appear to have been part of a black operation carried out with the cooperation of elements in the U.S. government.

In July 1965, I had just been commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force after taking a solemn oath that I would protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I took that oath very seriously. It was my constant companion throughout a thirty-year military career in the field of aircraft maintenance.

As an additional duty, aircraft maintenance officers are occasionally tasked as members of aircraft accident investigation boards and my personal experience was no exception. In 1989 I graduated from the Aircraft Mishap Investigation Course at the Institute of Safety and Systems Management at the University of Southern California. In addition to my direct participation as an aircraft accident investigator, I reviewed countless aircraft accident investigation reports for thoroughness and comprehensive conclusions for the Inspector General, HQ Pacific Air Forces during the height of the Vietnam conflict.

In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. This is because every military and civilian passenger-carrying aircraft has many parts that are identified for safety of flight. That is, if any of the parts were to fail at any time during a flight, the failure would likely result in the catastrophic loss of aircraft and passengers. Consequently, these parts are individually controlled by a distinctive serial number and tracked by a records section of the maintenance operation and by another section called plans and scheduling.

Following a certain number of flying hours or, in the case of landing gears, a certain number of takeoff-and-landing cycles, these critical parts are required to be changed, overhauled or inspected by specialist mechanics. When these parts are installed, their serial numbers are married to the aircraft registration numbers in the aircraft records and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists when the parts must be replaced. If the parts are not replaced within specified time or cycle limits, the airplane will normally be grounded until the maintenance action is completed. Most of these time-change parts, whether hydraulic flight surface actuators, pumps, landing gears, engines or engine components, are virtually indestructible. It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers. I repeat, impossible.

Considering the catastrophic incidents of September 11, 2001, certain troubling but irrefutable conclusions must be drawn from the known facts. I get no personal pleasure or satisfaction from reporting my own assessment of these facts. United Airlines Flight 93

This flight was reported by the federal government to be a Boeing 757 aircraft, registration number N591UA, carrying 45 persons, including four Arab hijackers who had taken control of the aircraft, crashing the plane in a Pennsylvania farm field.

Aerial photos of the alleged crash site were made available to the general public. They show a significant hole in the ground, but private investigators were not allowed to come anywhere near the crash site. If an aircraft crash caused the hole in the ground, there would have been literally hundreds of serially-controlled time-change parts within the hole that would have proved beyond any shadow of doubt the precise tail-number or identity of the aircraft. However, the government has not produced any hard evidence that would prove beyond a doubt that the specifically alleged aircraft crashed at that site. On the contrary, it has been reported that the aircraft, registry number N591UA, is still in operation. American Airlines Flight 11

This flight was reported by the government to be a Boeing 767, registration number N334AA, carrying 92 people, including five Arabs who had hijacked the plane. This plane was reported to have crashed into the north tower of the WTC complex of buildings.

Again, the government would have no trouble proving its case if only a few of the hundreds of serially controlled parts had been collected to positively identify the aircraft. A Boeing 767 landing gear or just one engine would have been easy to find and identify. United Airlines Flight 175

This flight was reported to be a Boeing 767, registration number N612UA, carrying 65 people, including the crew and five hijackers. It reportedly flew into the south tower of the WTC.

Once more, the government has yet to produce one serially controlled part from the crash site that would have dispelled any questions as to the identity of the specific airplane. American Airlines Flight 77

This was reported to be a Boeing 757, registration number N644AA, carrying 64 people, including the flight crew and five hijackers. This aircraft, with a 125-foot wingspan, was reported to have crashed into the Pentagon, leaving an entry hole no more than 65 feet wide.

Following cool-down of the resulting fire, it would have been very easy to collect enough time-change equipment at this crash site within 15 minutes to positively identify the aircraft registry. There was apparently some aerospace type of equipment found at the site but no attempt was made to produce aerial numbers or to identify the specific parts found. Some of the equipment removed from the building was actually hidden from public view. Conclusion

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11, 2001, resulting in the deaths of about 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. The hard evidence would have included hundreds of critical time-change aircraft items, plus security videotapes that were confiscated by the FBI immediately following each tragic episode.

With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. Regarding the planes that allegedly flew into the WTC towers, it is only just possible that heavy aircraft were involved in each incident, but no evidence has been produced that would add credence to the government's theoretical version of what actually caused the total destruction of the buildings, let alone proving the identity of the aircraft. That is the problem with the government's 911 story. It is time to apply the precautionary principle.

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history.

somebigguy
09-20-2005, 09:09 PM
In July 1965, I had just been commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force after taking a solemn oath that I would protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I would bear true faith and allegiance to the same. I took that oath very seriously.

Is this guy on the level, does he have any credibility?

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 09:11 PM
Apparently, it was originally posted on rense... rense... *shivers*

http://www.rense.com/general64/prec.htm

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 09:20 PM
I do my best to post 9/11 related news from places that are reputable, and some from places that "might" be reputable. I'd rather post it, and then discount it afterwards... the point is... some news outlets, no matter where they are, are covering 9/11 Truth...

somebigguy
09-20-2005, 09:26 PM
Apparently, it was originally posted on rense... rense... *shivers*

http://www.rense.com/general64/prec.htm
Yeah, but I'm talking about the guy who wrote the article that worked at the Air Force.

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 09:30 PM
Yeah, but I'm talking about the guy who wrote the article that worked at the Air Force.

I'm trying to verify he is who he says he is... not having much luck. You know, you could learn to use Google one of these days.

somebigguy
09-20-2005, 09:32 PM
I'm trying to verify he is who he says he is... not having much luck. You know, you could learn to use Google one of these days.
I'm googling, I'm googling...

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 09:35 PM
I'm googling, I'm googling...

I don't find anything that says he's legitimately a Lt. Col (Ret) anywhere other than other 9/11 sites.

somebigguy
09-20-2005, 09:48 PM
I don't find anything that says he's legitimately a Lt. Col (Ret) anywhere other than other 9/11 sites.
Looks like he's won a few awards for some things, but nothing that really talks about him.

princesskittypoo
09-20-2005, 10:15 PM
he's probably a faker.

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 10:16 PM
Looks like he's won a few awards for some things, but nothing that really talks about him.

List 'em...

krsjuan87
09-20-2005, 10:43 PM
what about the bodies from the planes.....did any of the families get to see there relatives bodies to positivly i.d. them....thats the one of the holes in the "goverment planned it" theory...no one ever talks about the bodies.....

Gold9472
09-20-2005, 10:45 PM
what about the bodies from the planes.....did any of the families get to see there relatives bodies to positivly i.d. them....thats the one of the holes in the we planned it theory...no one ever talks about the bodies.....

I don't know... I would think of all the planes, Flight 93 would have been the most likely candidate to have recognizable bodies. Unless of course it was blown out of the sky, which I think it was.

somebigguy
09-20-2005, 10:51 PM
Every one of the bodies at the pentagon was supposedly identified using DNA analysis. This is the same crash that disintegrated a 60 ton airplane into thin air. Apparently DNA is much more resilient than airplanes.

krsjuan87
09-20-2005, 10:56 PM
its horseshit.....we need to find info onthis.....i bet no one had open caskets but i bet there hypothetically should have been some bodies that were not completly burned or tore apart.....i wonder if the goverment let any of the families look at the remains

krsjuan87
07-17-2006, 07:34 PM
i am bumping this thread out of curiosity, were proper funerals or remains ever examined? do you have any info on this gold?

Tonya
07-18-2006, 02:29 AM
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/index.php

The above is a link to some evidence from the Moussaoui trial.
On this link you can find images (after the long list of links). You can look over these images if you wish to see what they presented at the trial. Some of the images are of bodies found at the Pentagon (VERY disturbing --despite how these people actually died, they are victims).

I have not reviewed the evidence on this site very much so I can't tell you whether they talk about the ID'ing process. I just thought I'd add this link if any of you are interested and haven't already seen it.

Let me know if you can't see the images and i can try to email them or something.

Tonya
07-18-2006, 02:32 AM
P.S. This link is good to have on hand. There are also images of the Pentagon, site of Flight 93' crash (?) etc..

borepstein
07-18-2006, 08:34 AM
Is this guy on the level, does he have any credibility?

Well, I don't know the guy but what he says makes perfect sense. Aircraft technology, with the exception of electronics, has not undergone significant change since 1965. Hydralic pumps, wheels, actuators still need to be changed and serviced periodically, and failure to do so may lead to massive death and destruction. So those parts are definitely still being tracked and will be for the foreseable future.

borepstein
07-18-2006, 08:37 AM
Here's some more about the 9/11 planes:

The strange saga of the 9/11 planes (http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11198)