Tuesday, March 06, 2007

IS AL COA THE ENERGIZER BUNNY?

who could have imagined that anyone would be so manic.

as to investigations of aircraft accidents....

"decades ago, when i first became an aviator, i subscribed to a publication, AIR FACTS. edited by richard collins, if my memory serves me accurately.

it was an interesting periodical. it was devoted to recounting FAA investigations into aircraft accidents. with a focus on general aviation.

over the years, the investigations into the causes of aircraft accidents has fascinated me.

now, there have been investigations that i think became compromised[panam103, sr111, ea990, as261, to name but a few] but at least there were investigations.

my recollection is that investigations of aircraft accidents has been mandated by regulation/statute since the earliest days of aviation.

one of the most salient aspects of 11/09/01 was that the normal investigation[s] into the "collision with terrain" sites was prohibited by the potus.

i know of only one other aircraft accident investigation that was similarly squelched. jfk jr's "collision with terrain".

from my perspective, instantly upon an aircraft "collision with terrain", by statute/regulation, the collision site[s] becomes a "crime" scene[s] and should have been handled accordingly. and i know this because of my cousin's accident...immediately, the farmer's field where he went down was cordoned off. and it was cordoned off until the investigation was finished. the fields were combed for parts. all parts of his bell ranger were identified by serial numbers. and all parts of the airframe were trailered to an FAA site for examination, reconstruction. this is the normal practice. and has been for decades.

but that didn't happen that day. why would the potus have prohibited the normal investigations of "collision with terrain" sites?

what would the american public have learned had there been a real investigation that commenced that day? well, we might have learned whether aircraft debris was a part of the purported colliding aircraft tail numbers.

let it not be forgotten,virtually all critical aircraft components are serialized. and that serial number can be traced to a registered airframe. because of the potus' prohibitions of an investigation, significant components at the collision sites, which would have been serialized, were collected and buried[at fresh kills?].

did the potus prohibit the normal investigation because significant component debris would reveal that the colliding aircraft were not the ones the state has told you were the colliders?

i do not doubt that aircraft collided with terrain that day. there is just no good probative evidence that the colliders were the aircraft according to the official story.

i want to close this way, i think this manic bastid asserted that the pentagon site was littered with aircraft debris. what an odd assertion. the salient aspect of that "collision with terrain" site was the absence of significant debris.

what you should have seen in that collision site was the engines, the tail assembly, most of the wings, lying on the ground in front of the building. as a lt col[karen kwiatkowski] reported, to her eyes, the most amazing aspect of that collision site was the absence of debris.

the bushit explanation for the disappearance of AA77 debris is that totality of that aircraft vaporized. let me say this, in the history of aviation accidents, no colliding aircraft has ever vaporized.

and i think that the usg's explanation of this site become even more fanciful. though the aircraft vaporized, the military's autopsists claim to have recovered passenger bodies and examined them.

though i think it true that a human being might require higher temperatures to become vaporized than would a 757, the usg account remains a story that doesn't meet the smell test.

the official story stinks.

8 Comments:

Blogger Al Coa said...

as to investigations of aircraft accidents....

These were not accidents. They were criminal acts involving a conspiracy to use commercial airliners to attack multiple targets.

now, there have been investigations that i think became compromised[panam103, sr111, ea990, as261, to name but a few] but at least there were investigations.

So even if the NTSB is involved they can still be made to ‘compromise’ an investigation. So in your mind an official NTSB investigation is not to be trusted anyway. Right?

one of the most salient aspects of 11/09/01 was that the normal investigation[s] into the "collision with terrain" sites was prohibited by the potus

You have some link that shows that the POTUS ‘prohibited’ a ‘normal investigation? I’d like to see it. Or is this another one of your recollections? This was an unprecedented terrorist attack on US soil. Why would the NTSB be designated as the lead investigative body? That's just stupid. The NTSB is charged with determining the causes of accidents involving planes and trains and buses etc.... The FBI is the nations lead criminal investigative body under the Department of Justice. Why would the NTSB be given authority over the criminal investigation in this case?

from my perspective, instantly upon an aircraft "collision with terrain", by statute/regulation, the collision site[s] becomes a "crime" scene[s] and should have been handled accordingly.

Crime scene you say? Well here’s an NTSB document from September 13, 2001 which indicates that the FBI is the lead agency conducting the investigation and the NTSB is providing technical personnel and assistance to the FBI.

because of the potus' prohibitions of an investigation, significant components at the collision sites, which would have been serialized, were collected and buried[at fresh kills?].

The NTSB document says NTSB personnel are helping to identify aircraft parts and search for black boxes. What source tells you that all aircraft parts were collected and buried? Link? Obviously, the cause of the crashes was not at issue. They were intentionally crashed. Actually identifying the aircraft by serial number would have been quite simple and, if I dare say, rather a moot point to anyone accept someone such as yourself who believes scores of government employees were complicit in pulling off a massive conspiracy. For anyone other than a nut like yourself this was a non-issue. The investigators knew which planes were involved. Identifying plane parts would have been an insignificant aspect of their work in determining who carried out the attacks and how. Hence it would not figure in any meaningful way in their reports.

i do not doubt that aircraft collided with terrain that day. there is just no good probative evidence that the colliders were the aircraft according to the official story.

That’s not what you have written in other places. You stated on a comment thread at The Left Coaster on February 28th, 2007 that ‘no aircraft’ struck the Pentagon on 9/11.

i want to close this way, i think this manic bastid asserted that the pentagon site was littered with aircraft debris. what an odd assertion.

You may find it odd, but it is true.

the salient aspect of that "collision with terrain" site was the absence of significant debris.

Oh! So now we’ve raised the bar to ‘significant debris’? And what constitutes ‘significant debris’? Recognizable pieces? Engines maybe? Pieces of aircraft skin?

what you should have seen in that collision site was the engines…

See the above link which has clear photos of the remains of the engines.

…the tail assembly, most of the wings, lying on the ground in front of the building.

the wings lying on the ground in front of the building? This is just ludicric on it’s face. The plane hit the building at several hundred miles an hour. It was made primarily of aluminum. Do you suppose it would have just bounced off the reinforced concrete walls of the Pentagon and came to rest on the lawn?

as a lt col[karen kwiatkowski] reported, to her eyes, the most amazing aspect of that collision site was the absence of debris.

It was amazing. Of course it was amazing. The violence of a commercial airliner being almost completely obliterated in a collision with a building is pretty amazing. What she didn't say was that she disputed that it was an airliner that struck the building. Again, photos from the scene clearly show aircraft debris around the site.

the bushit explanation for the disappearance of AA77 debris is that totality of that aircraft vaporized. let me say this, in the history of aviation accidents, no colliding aircraft has ever vaporized.

Obvious pieces of debris were found. Look at the photographs. What official agency has said the plane ‘vaporized? Give me a link.

though i think it true that a human being might require higher temperatures to become vaporized than would a 757, the usg account remains a story that doesn't meet the smell test.

So after dismissing the suggestion that identifiable human remains could have been found you hedge? Again, show me an official report that speaks of ‘vaporization’? By the way, did you see the photos of the crash in Indonesia from yesterday? An airliner overshot the runway and the fusilage almost completely burned. It didn’t slam into anything. It was stopped, intact, and burned almost completely while fire crews were trying to put the fire out. And after the fire was out they recovered burned bodies from what was left. Hmmmm.

8:15 AM  
Blogger Al Coa said...

Why is it you can't present anything more substantive than your opinions and recollections?

The official story doesn't pass the smell test but you can accept that the WTC buildings were mined with demolition explosives simply because someone told you one of the buildings was closed for a weekend to install communications wiring?

LOL!

8:20 AM  
Blogger Mooser said...

No way in hell those airliners knocked those buildings down.

9:34 AM  
Blogger Al Coa said...

No way in hell those airliners knocked those buildings down.

Based on your expert assessment from your single viewing of the collapse coverage?

Gee thanks.

I guess it's case closed then?

9:40 AM  
Blogger iamcoyote said...

Well, I'm convinced.

Al Coa has presented a stellar argument, complete with linkage. It's all come down to albert's "recollections," which, frankly, haven't proven to be very reliable.

The only suspense now is whether albert cries "uncle" or whether he'll stomp his feet, mumble "because I said so, that's why," and ban Al Coa to prevent him from influencing his fellow foil-hatters with logic and evidence.

9:42 AM  
Blogger iamcoyote said...

Ah, I see I needn't have worried about logic infecting albert's readers...

9:44 AM  
Blogger Mooser said...

I guess it's case closed then?

It sure as hell is.

Please take into account the destroyer Turner Joy is moored in view of my house, a glorious monument to American veracity.

1:21 PM  
Blogger Al Coa said...

Please take into account the destroyer Turner Joy is moored in view of my house,

Too bad you can't take in the view. What with your head being so far up your ass and all.

...a glorious monument to American veracity.

While the manipulation of the events that occured in the Gulf of Tonkin in 1964 is indeed a black mark on American history it is not analogous to your take on the events of September 11, 2001. There was indeed an attack by North Vietnamese forces on an American ship. Whether or not the NV were justified in doing so is a valid point of debate. The US government did not stage events, nor attack it's own assets, in the Gulf of Tonkin as you maintain it did on 9/11. The second, and as it turns out the nonexistant, attack on US forces in the Gulf was at first believed to be a genuine attack. It was not staged by the US government. The facts were, however, known in short order by the president that the second attack never happened but the Johnson administration chose to keep it quite. We all know why.

So if you're gonna compare the Gulf of Tonkin incident to 9/11 you're gonna come up a bit short in your effort to use it as evidence that the US government staged an actual attack on itself in order to facilitate a war.

2:12 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home