Slashdot Mirror

In all seriousness; how long until the military just deploys (via parachute drop, or soldier) robots into decent vantage points and then just get them to identify targets and have a remote operator push the button... scary stuff.

Who needs the military? Samsung makes robots like that for sentry duty, and has for years: http://media.abovetopsecret.com/media/854/Samsungs_Killbot/

What's with the Pirates of the Caribbean music about half way in? Avast! There be a robotic sentry, says I!

In all seriousness; how long until the military just deploys (via parachute drop, or soldier) robots into decent vantage points and then just get them to identify targets and have a remote operator push the button... scary stuff.

Who needs the military? Samsung makes robots like that for sentry duty, and has for years:

http://media.abovetopsecret.com/media/854/Samsungs_Killbot/

"Banri Kaieda spoke to reporters on Sunday shortly after Tokyo Electric Power Company presented a road map to cool down the reactors and significantly reduce radiation leaks in 6 to 9 months" http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/17_16.html It's only 6 to 9 months no big deal right? "Radiation levels measured between the double doors of those reactor buildings was 270 millisieverts in the Number One reactor, 12 in Number 2, and 10 in Number 3. The radiation level detected at the Number One reactor exceeds the national exposure limit of 250 millisieverts for nuclear contract workers." http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/18_03.html Three reactors melting down and at least one breached , plus several tons of waste fuels rods that have melted or blown away and are still currently boiling off, plutonium found around the plant on the ground , not to mention the dumping of highly radioactive water into the ocean for over a month but no big deal right? http://www.vgb.org/vgbmultimedia/News/Fukushimav15VGB.pdf If you have a mind to look behind the curtain http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread672665/pg739

I guess all this stuff is not real, is it? any opinion on that or similar planes?

From http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread208712/pg1:

"Defense Contractor Leaks Details of a U.S. antigravitic space fighter-bomber, the Advanced TAW-50"

I think the word 'antigravitic' there answers your first question.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread685706/pg1

Did some more research.... apparently this was declassified in the 70s and published in several books from that time. I don't know how much I would read into it.

Reading the message myself, it sounds like a "we got a report from someone else, and didn't look into it." I'm sure you could find dozens of "reports of UFO activity" in police and FBI call logs throughout the entire time it became popular.

Plus, he got it from an Air Force informant? Whoop dee doo, We already had a public Air Force informant telling the public that we recovered a UFO, who was later overruled by the rest of the military.

The whole memo reads like a damned telephone game. "I heard from Jessica that Barbra told her that Jill likes Henry"... awesome.. thanks for the info...

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread685706/pg1

Did some more research.... apparently this was declassified in the 70s and published in several books from that time. I don't know how much I would read into it.

Nuclear power plants in the US are designed to withstand the anticipated ground motions. This link http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread674273/pg1 points out the presumed issue, but read the responses. So here's a ridiculously alarmist link for those who lean that direction: http://www.sott.net/articles/show/225939-15-Nuclear-Reactors-on-New-Madrid-Fault-Line

"The twelve-tone equal-tempered scale is the smallest equal-tempered scale that contains all seven of the basic consonant intervals to a good approximation — within one percent."

http://thinkzone.wlonk.com/Music/12Tone.htm

Convert pi to base 12:

PI in base_12 = 3.184809493b9186459aaa3a83 (approximation)

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread352234/pg

Now play 3.184809493b9186459aaa3a83.... as keyboard notes.

Bullshit. Point me to this long list of informant names from the first release. This site found that out of a long list of names originally in the documents, three informant names were left in the first release -- of which was dead and another was a double agent.

You're a tool because you're stating falsities based on things you don't know, and take for granted for Fox News and other bullshit propagandist sources.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread556388/pg1

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-488662/Iraq-whistleblower-Dr-Kelly-WAS-murdered-silence-says-MP.html

http://www.deccanherald.com/content/46616/whistleblower-rti-activist-satish-shetty.html

http://hollyonthehill.wordpress.com/2010/08/10/bp-whistleblower-found-dead/

Those are the first things Google brought up. I know I didn't provide any sources, the information in that post I learned while taking a Business Ethics class and I'm too lazy to dig out the text book and find examples.

replying to myself with source of information: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread599045/pg1

Given that level of concern and wariness, I doubt he'd be "full of himself".

Also, the CIA and other TLAs are very very good at doing much more nasty things.

I'd say, the combined probability of each logical linkage and Occam's Razor imply that the most obvious and clear answer is probably the most correct, and yours is a bit more complex than the GP comment.

Here: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread598661/pg1

Mind you, this is the ONLY thing you can read, that actually HAS any numbers. Just check all the propaganda around and you see it's just "maybe putting in danger, countless lives", etc. None of those US newspapers, none, mentions any numbers. Says a lot about how uninformed or tendentious are the journalists writing those articles.

Hi, yes, it's here. But I actually can only find 2 names, not 3: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread598661/pg1

Please mod my parent post up - or undo the ignorant troll moderation via meta-moderation.

Nothing in the post is trolling.

The Troll mod should stay, you deserved it. If you were not trolling, your extremely naive. Only Rupert Murdochs paper The Times/Fox media mouthpieces tried to make the claim that people have already been assassinated based on this material. However there is not one single shred of evidence to back up the claim - not even a single name of someone potentially in danger. Oh yeah, the one name that they did mention on the front page, implying that it was recent assassination - actually died two years ago... but they fail to mention little facts like that, or tell you buried right down on page 13.

On the other hand, you have direct evidence of thousands of civilian deaths. I don't see you being too concerned about that FACT - only some Fox fiction. So, please stop your trolling - or switch off Fox news and friends, mouthpieces for the MIC, and start thinking for yourself.

Are you kidding? That thing can't even stand up to a bird with a bagel.

It was a baguette, you insensitive clod!

Please see: Did a Time-traveling Bird Sabotage the Large Hadron Collider?

I liked the first comment:

Doesn't this concern anyone here? People controlling a multi billion dollar machine think birds from the future are making there machine not work.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread494986/pg1

Tin-foil hat wiki:

TWA Flight 800: A civilian airliner shot down by the US Navy.

9/11: The attacks carried out on the United States in 2001 by agents of the Mossad with the backing of the GWB administration.

Wi-Fi: A wireless communications system that is known to cause brain cancer and other neurological disorders.

You obviously aren't familiar with this site.

As for the possibility of present-day humans guiding manned secret UFO aircrafts, unlikely.

If it was a cover to hide US aerospace designs there would be reams of paperwork describing operating procedures that would have turned up in court enforced FOI discoveries and fact-finding inquiries demanded by congressional committees some 50-60 years after the fact. We also wouldn't have people like Milton Torres coming forward saying they were told to shoot down UFOs. It also wouldn't make sense for the US to buzz their own planes. Likewise, why would the US conduct massive studies in to a phenomenon (Project Twinkle, Project Sign, Grudge, Blue Book, etc) which could be attributed to its own manufacture? It would be a waste of time, resources, and man-power with potential to expose the cover project.

Also consider that if all unexplained UFO sightings represent secret American aircrafts then the United States has "spent hundreds of billions of dollars on known and highly inferior aircraft to be used in a cover-up of such deeply classified activities. These inferior aircraft must have been used and continue to be used while far superior aircraft have been kept in hiding instead of being employed to prevent or win wars which have cost many lives and endangered many more."(1)

It simply doesn't make sense.

Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generators use explosives and are orders of magnitude above what you can generate using standard electronic components.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread59555/pg1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_generator

I can't believe how wrong-headed this post is. True, blowing a 10MT bomb in times square wouldn't physically crush the roads or even all the buildings but hundreds of thousands would die, perhaps even a million. The lethal radius purely from burn injuries is out to several miles. Here's a pic of radii for a 550Kt bomb.

Nuclear weapons are a gun to the head of every man, woman and child on earth. Who cares who "wins the war" when tens or hundreds of millions of innocents lie dead by the end of it?

I can't count how many times I've had to tell people that most observations are very likely yet-unknown atmospheric phenomenon. Though I'm also quick to point out that there have been cases that do suggest intelligence. Part of the problem is that the word 'UFO' has never achieved an officially agreed upon definition. Depending on its usage the word UFO can mean a number of things.

Some people use Dr. Hartman's definition (the stimulus for a report made by one or more individuals of something seen in the sky ... which the observer could not identify as having an ordinary natural origin, and which seemed to him sufficiently puzzling that he undertook to make a report of it).

Others imply Dr. Hynek's usage (a UFO is a report the contents of which are puzzling not only to the observer but to others who have the technical training the observer may lack).

However by far the most common definition is the ET hypothesis or alien spacecrafts.

Analyzing all the usages it becomes obvious UFO actually means "a process to identify an unidentified aerial sighting."

Fig. 1 - http://wiki.razing.net/index.php/Image:UFO_definition.png

The problem at the moment is there are very few bodies that are willing to do "official" evaluations to complete the "official escalation of explanation" loop.

What I find compelling is that the US government was confronted by many scientists who agreed average people were reporting a "true unknown" phenomenon throughout the '40s and '60s (Drs. Mirarchi, La Paz, Hynek, Thayer, Shough, J. E. McDonald, R. Leo Sprinkle, Garry C. Henderson, Roger N. Shepard, Robert Hall, James Harder, Robert M. L. Baker, Frank Salisbury, Seymour Hess, Charles B. Moore, Al Cameron, Robert M. Wood, Eugene Epstein, Gordon MacDonald, Robert Wilson, etc). In response to this the USAF / AFSAB started Twinkle and escalated to Project Sign, Grudge, Blue Book and finally the Condon Committee.

Unfortunately Dr. Edward Condon's report was "authoritative" enough to render all opposing viewpoints moot despite 30% of the reviewed cases remaining unknown after spending $500,000 of taxpayers money. Even scientists with an anti-UFO position considered the report rubbish (ie/ Thornton Page) because the "Conclusions and Recommendations" and "Summary of the Study" didn't accurately reflect the contents of the study.

Sadly I think history is going to have a very poor view of Dr. Condon for one simple reason. As humans we know that we don't understand all of reality and thus we accept the following Venn diagram as true (obviously the percentages vary).

Fig. 2 - http://wiki.razing.net/index.php/Image:Human_understanding.png

Effectively by shouting down the study of UFOs Condon was stating that there was nothing new in our skies that is "truly unknown" that could be learned through the anecdotal testimony of the average person. In Dr. Condon's words,

As indicated by its title, the emphasis of this study has been on attempting to learn from UFO reports anything that could be considered as adding to scientific knowledge. Our general conclusion is that nothing has come from the study of UFOs in the past 21 years that has added to scientific knowledge. Careful consideration of the record as it is available to us leads us to conclude that further extensive study of UFOs probably cannot be justified in the expectation that science will be advanced thereby.
(Source: (1969) Scientific Study of Unidentified Flying Objects. Boulder, Colorado: Bantam Books. ISBN NA, pg. 1)

With the help of hindsight we can prove Dr. Condon wrong.

Sprites, large scale electrical discharges that occur high above thunderstorm clouds, were documented "with anecd

Rationale : Governments of the world decided they are not paying retirements to baby boomers and that the world cannot sustain so much people so they decided to eliminate some. Neither Capitalism or socialism are interested in this many people.

They infect Mexico with some Baxter cooked mixture of bird, pig, and man flu. See the news of how Baxter sent some contaminated diceases.

People get infected in Mexico but the pandemic is not as big as premeditated, so they get HAARP or some other EMP space weapon to shake the earth, in order for them to come out. As an exercise on the probability of an Earthquake on mexico, check google earth and view all earthquakes on Mexico, not so much quakes right.

Next (Monday) is the backup presidential plane flying over NY(business centre) and spreading the flu virus, and since people would remember that the flu started in Mexico nobody would associate the two facts

.

Big holiday coming Friday, workers day, that means that many workers will come to the street to demand jobs, and only get the flu, that already already has matured since monday.

Fast forward to Monday a level 6 pandemic is going on.

Time goes on, and by 2012, in London during the Olimpics, Gordon Brown, talks about the glorious Brave New World Order

. Feel free to add to my humble conspiracy, and check others at http://abovetopsecret.com/ .

I believe what they are trying to cover under the UFO BS is Aurora. The reason I say that is they fly the damned thing over rural states like mine(AR) when it is cloudy, probably testing out those noisy but bad ass engines. The damned thing sounds like a cross between a freight train and a jet and if the sky is clear and calm at dawn you will see the "donuts on a rope" exhaust trail the thing leaves behind. It has got to be the noisiest "secret" I have ever heard.

But what better way to cover up Aurora than have every nutjob with an abduction story on hard copy so that everyone is looking for little green men instead of super expensive hypersonic combat aircraft? You have to admit, you couldn't cook up a better disinformation campaign if you tried. But with Goldman Sachs there are plenty of eyes on them after the bailout. What better way to cover up the truck full of money you are sneaking out the back than to promote some paranoid whackjob with the Streisand Effect? The only way Goldman Sachs will get caught is if some whistleblower manages to sneak some seriously damaging paperwork to Wikileaks. Otherwise they are just going to laugh all the way to the bank.

I'm sure the CIA backers of facebook know if it's the right name or not.

Why were there no aircraft fuselage fragments at the Pentagon "crash site" on 9/11?

Will people please stop with this one ? It's not like there is no evidence for this.

A link provided by the site you gave makes an equally compelling contrary argument.

I never said it did or didn't happen, I'm saying there are more secrets than truth. In this case something is definitely amiss. That 757 did 1/10th the initial damage the twin towers ones did, the wings don't even leave a mark on the building, then 99% of the plane vanished into thin air. How many eye witnesses, circumstantial evidence, and withheld surveillance footage does it take to bend the laws of physics?

The options that come up when you consider what it could have been if not a 757 are pretty horrific. I almost prefer that those truths not come out.

Why were there no aircraft fuselage fragments at the Pentagon "crash site" on 9/11?

Will people please stop with this one ? It's not like there is no evidence for this.

Did you know that every almost Target store in the United States is being fitted (or retrofitted) with Automatic Number Plate Recognition systems? In english, they tag you to your car.

Confirmation.

I see a market for gadgets that can easily make plates unreadable when not on public roadways.
I'm thinking electrochromic plate covers.

After giving the New York Times article a little bit more time to settle there are three points that I wanted to review further. The first was how the article came to use the term extreme communities. I did read over the Vaughan Bell article was a reference is made to such communities. http://arginine.spc.org/vaughan/Bell_2007_JMH_Preprint.pdf According to what Dr Bell wrote in the article it was views considered extreme or unacceptable by the mainstream. Using this definition I wondered if things such as the 9/11 truth movement would be an extreme community? Their views are not considered mainstream. I also wondered who else might fall into this list based on Dr Bell's definition? Websites that cover conspiracy topics might well meet his definition of extreme communities. Many of the subject matters covered on websites such as http://www.abovetopsecret.com/ would fall into this category. They would be a website of mini patches of extreme communities. Another factor that I thought should be calculated in when defining a community as an extreme community is the obvious, is the community helpful vs harmful? What kind of purpose do they serve? If I go to a website that has what by some is considered an extreme view that encourages me to kill myself, then that should be considered different than going to a website that expounds none traditional views, but steers the website viewer away from inflicting harm to themselves? There are lot's of websites that conform to traditional or more traditional mainstream views that in my opinion are probably fairly harmful to some aspects of society, but we turn a blind eye, because it does pass mainstream muster. The definition as is, in my opinion is fairly broad, and the references to the term were limited except for references to Dr Bell's work and the New York Times article. The other point that I am wondering about is who or what now defines what is mainstream or normal? In today's society we have so many different variables to consider. At one time spending all your time online might have been considered the actions of lonely desperate people. Now with websites such as Facebook, and much of web 2.0 culture, being online is considered normal, and spending many hours online as long as it's spent socialising is considered a fairly normal and healthy activity. According to a report from Mediamark Research in a 30 day period 2.5 million adults participated in online dating. I am sure they find this to be completely normal and mainstream, but I am sure there are patches of society that do not agree with this. http://www.mediamark.com/PDF/Nearly%202.5%20Million%20Adults%20Participated%20in%20Online%20Dating%20in%20Last%2030%20Days.pdf World of WarCraft reached 11 Million monthly Subscribers. Many of them sane individuals who go online to take part in these roleplaying games. For that community, I am sure they consider themselves normal and mainstream, just by their sheer numbers. I am sure there are still many in society who would not however consider going online to roleplay normal, mainstream or even healthy. http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170971 Thus what would be considered as abnormal or extreme view offline is often a normal and accepted view online, in many different circles. Eg. 9/11 conspiracy offline, might still be considered anti-government or none traditional, but online they are a fairly regular part of web culture and discussions. When defining mainstream and referencing the Internet, we might have to start finding different ways to do so. Eg. I just read an article today, that talks about a real life couple getting divorced because he is cheating online with a virtual girlfriend. Traditional definitions are having to be adapted and redef

After giving the New York Times article a little bit more time to settle there are three points that I wanted to review further.

The first was how the article came to use the term extreme communities. I did read over the Vaughan Bell article was a reference is made to such communities.

http://arginine.spc.org/vaughan/Bell_2007_JMH_Preprint.pdf

According to what Dr Bell wrote in the article it was views considered extreme or unacceptable by the mainstream. Using this definition I wondered if things such as the 9/11 truth movement would be an extreme community? Their views are not considered mainstream. I also wondered who else might fall into this list based on Dr Bell's definition?

Websites that cover conspiracy topics might well meet his definition of extreme communities. Many of the subject matters covered on websites such as http://www.abovetopsecret.com/ would fall into this category. They would be a website of mini patches of extreme communities.

Another factor that I thought should be calculated in when defining a community as an extreme community is the obvious, is the community helpful vs harmful? What kind of purpose do they serve? If I go to a website that has what by some is considered an extreme view that encourages me to kill myself, then that should be considered different than going to a website that expounds none traditional views, but steers the website viewer away from inflicting harm to themselves?

There are lot's of websites that conform to traditional or more traditional mainstream views that in my opinion are probably fairly harmful to some aspects of society, but we turn a blind eye, because it does pass mainstream muster.

The definition as is, in my opinion is fairly broad, and the references to the term were limited except for references to Dr Bell's work and the New York Times article.

The other point that I am wondering about is who or what now defines what is mainstream or normal? In today's society we have so many different variables to consider. At one time spending all your time online might have been considered the actions of lonely desperate people. Now with websites such as Facebook, and much of web 2.0 culture, being online is considered normal, and spending many hours online as long as it's spent socialising is considered a fairly normal and healthy activity.

According to a report from Mediamark Research in a 30 day period 2.5 million adults participated in online dating. I am sure they find this to be completely normal and mainstream, but I am sure there are patches of society that do not agree with this.
http://www.mediamark.com/PDF/Nearly%202.5%20Million%20Adults%20Participated%20in%20Online%20Dating%20in%20Last%2030%20Days.pdf

World of WarCraft reached 11 Million monthly Subscribers. Many of them sane individuals who go online to take part in these roleplaying games. For that community, I am sure they consider themselves normal and mainstream, just by their sheer numbers. I am sure there are still many in society who would not however consider going online to roleplay normal, mainstream or even healthy.

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3170971

Thus what would be considered as abnormal or extreme view offline is often a normal and accepted view online, in many different circles. Eg. 9/11 conspiracy offline, might still be considered anti-government or none traditional, but online they are a fairly regular part of web culture and discussions. When defining mainstream and referencing the Internet, we might have to start finding different ways to do so.

Eg. I just read an article today, that talks about a real life couple getting divorced because he is cheating online with a virtual girlfr

That doesn't bug me as much as the lack of oversight on these "stings".Did they have an independent branch keeps logs of all conversations online so we know they didn't toss out any "unusable"(entrapment) transactions? And don't think cops won't try to set you up? BS! I'll relate a little personal story just to give a taste.

The good old '90s was the time,where Windows was built on top of DOS and was as stable as a crackhead on bad dope,and I ran a chat room for Windows errors. You know the type,"OMG this thing runs for 5 minutes and then turns blue and says gibberish!".So I'm fixing a VXD error when suddenly this "chick" comes on and starts hitting on me HARD. At first I tell her she is in the wrong site,this is for Windows PC errors,etc but she just won't stop. One filthy suggestion after another and "What's a matter,you don't like hot teen girls or something?" Finally I say " Look I'm working here. Take your dumb jailbait ass and go to a chat site and let those that are having a problem with their PCs get the help they need before I block your IP!"

The screen goes dead for a few minutes,then returns with "This is Officer Jaynes of The Arizona PD working with a federal task force to catch online predators. I just wanted to thank you,for you are the first person who hasn't taken the bait in nearly six months and I was beginning to think all guys were predators." I said "Well considering IANAL but even I know that what you were doing is entrapment,congratulations! I have just looked up the IP range for the Arizona PD and as soon as I push this button you're blacklisted. Buh Bye!"

So I think that the SAME rules that apply to meatspace should be applied to cyberspace. If the FBI does a sting in meatspace everything from the initial conversation right up to the arrest is taped,usually on video,so we can see that no entrapment was going on and to give the FBI extra evidence at trial. So any FBI servers should be managed by a separate company and every single thing going through them should be logged,period. Because I am all for catching pervs and ID thieves,with all the stunts like this,where they didn't even bother to log referrers so a rickroll could have ended with you in jail or dead,frankly I don't trust them as far as I can throw their server blade.

Alternately, a different finance-related conspiracy theory can be found here: http://abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread393789/pg1 and here: http://finance.google.com/group/google.finance.983582/browse_thread/thread/aad550b590f931bf .

Of course, massively bogus, though entertaining, especially if you liked (or liked some of the background sources of) the Da Vinci Code.

excuse me, but a fuckin twin engined passenger liner debris cant fill that hole the pentagon had.

I have already linked to pages explaining that the "entrance wound" hole in the exterior wall was just about the size of the fuselage of the plane -the hole was was 16 to 20 feet wide; a 757's body is about 13 feet in diameter. It's a very good fit.

and there were no passenger liner pieces in those holes they videoed.

As I have already explained to you, videos taken immediately after the event were from a distance and obscured by smoke. Most of the plane was reduced to tiny scraps. Of course nothing would have been visible.

also, governments, interest groups, political factions have been mounting millions of unbelievable plots since the dawn of time.

If you choose to believe in vast conspiracies, no amount of evidence will sway you, since any piece of data can be dismissed as part of the conspiracy. Nothing and no one can be trusted.

In common parlance, we call that "batshit crazy".

I hope someday your mental health improves.

This ends my comments on the subject.

why there was NO remainder of anything a passenger plane crash leaves in a crash site, and there were NO bodies, passenger belongings, pieces of bodies, ANYTHING but fairly intact TWO bodies in the scene.

Are you saying there were no bodies, or were you saying there were two?

Allyn E. Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers (a company involved in providing emergency engineering and post-collapse assistance) said "I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts."

Of course, once you reach the level of batshitness you've achieved, you can simply ignore his testimony by saying "they got to him too!"

And I'm sure you simply don't accept the claim that the remains of 184 people were identified; surely "they" got to all 102 DNA analysts, sample processors, logistics staff, and administrative personnel at the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory. It's a DOD facility, after all.

Are you saying there was no debris from the plane? That's simply incorrect; hell, you can even see photos of a bunch of it at this batshit conspiracy site. And photos of the plane debris inside the building (where, in answer to your question about the lawn, most of it ended up, in agreement with conservation of momentum) can be seen at this somewhat less batshit crazy site. And some more photos here. And more photos, with amazingly detailed analysis, here

But I'm sure "they" got to the owners of all of those sites.

tell me where the hell did the 767's huge tail has vanished.

757. If you can't get that much right after being corrected, I don't see any point in talking to you further.

Like most of the plane, the tail and wings got shredded, and ended up inside the building. As Mete Sozen, a structural engineer who studied the impact in computer simulation, put it, "At that speed, the plane itself is like a sausage skin. It doesn't have much strength and virtually crumbles on impact."

It's like shooting an aluminum foil origami crane out of an air cannon at high speed, through a stack of steel cheese graters, and then demanding "where's the crane's tail? There must be a trick!"

please, spare the bullshit. as if the world has never seen a passenger liner crash.

Into a building? One as hardened as the part of the Pentagon that was hit? Please, name me one similar crash.

Oh, and by the way, regarding your original question about simulating the piloting of the crash, see this:

Brian also consulted with a pair of commercial airline pilots who decided to try this kind of approach in a flight training simulator. Although the pilots were not sure the simulator models such scenarios with complete accuracy, they reported no significant difficulties in flying a 757 within an altitude of tens of feet at speeds between 350 and 550 mph (565 to 885 km/h) across smooth terrain. The only issue they encountered was constant warnings from the simulator about flying too fast and too low. These warnings were expected since the manufacturer does not recommend and FAA regulations prohibit flying a commercial aircraft the way Flight 77 was flown. These restrictions do not mean it is impossible for a plane to fly at those conditions but that it is extremely hazardous to do so, and safety was obviously not a concern to the terroris

It could, but this isn't the first time he has made these claims. He isn't the only person from that era either. Buzz Aldrin from the appolo 11 missions has made similar claims.

I have heard others too. They attempt to hide their identities to not be retaliated on but they sound just like other astronauts who where in positions to know.

This is the first time I have hear an astronaut claim Roswell was real though. The rest of what he said seems to be the same.

Disclaimer:

1. I've got no ties with Iran whatsoever
2. I'm not saying that I agree with the Iranian leaders either

That being said: what about the everyday Iranians?!?

Inside the real Iran

Despite the welcome for their President's nuclear bragging and anti-Israel rhetoric, many Iranians have private worries about the economy - and the threat of war. By Angus McDowall in Tehran and Raymond Whitaker

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/inside-the-real-iran-474365.html

The REAL Iran:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread368018/pg1

And look at those desert dwelling people!

TEHERAN - Mega Capital of IRAN
http://www.worldisround.com/articles/98910/
(huge page! broadband only)

But, yes.. the 'everything in Iran is horrible and they need to be freed' machine is running and running. I admit that it isn't a perfect country, but what about North-Korea (oh wait: they've already got a deterrent)? Zimbabwe? Darfur/Sudan?
(who cares about poor people that are suppressed in areas without natural resources? they don't need democracy!)

I give a war against Iran an 80% chance, before the elections.

http://youtube.com/results?q=war+iran&search_type=

We need more oil and more beachheads to contain upcoming super powers like India and China... ... and the whole world will be dragged down into darkness when that happens..

Try this out for size...

Of course hemp comes up! Hemp does everything! With it, you can make rope, clothes, food, furnature, computer chips, gold, planets, the One Ring, you name it, hemp can do it!

Q: I've heard hemp mills are awfully loud.
A: They run as quiet as a cloud.

Q: What if, perchance, hemp plastics should bend?
A: Not on your life, my stoner friend.

Q: What about us doped-up slobs?
A: You'll be given cushy jobs!

Q: The ring came off my pudding can!
A: Use a hemp one, my good man.

Q: Were you sent here by the devil?
A: No, good sir, I'm on the level.

You see, America, hemp's your only choice. Put down your bongs and raise your voice!

Oh, yeah, it looks like the 70's version. I was hoping for this. Maybe that's not a good thing because the last thing you want is you IT staff in the computer room all the time with their pants down and, well, you get the idea.

There is speculation that the US had a military space program called Blackstar, that used a high-speed bomber to launch small orbital vehicles similar to the National Aerospace Plane -- although this would be considered two-stage-to-orbit.
What Aviation Week & Space Tech has to say about it, claiming an modified XB-70 was used as the launch vehicle.
Another, more whackjob, account.

I submitted this as a story when AW&ST originally broke the story but it as rejected. I was/am fascinated by the idea that we might've had an entire space program, with astronauts working out there on a regular basis, that is basically unknown to the public. It seems pretty unlikely but there's a lot of material to support the idea.

The X-15 rocketplane, an air-launched manned research vehicle with a maximum speed of more than Mach 6 and a maximum altitude of more than fifty miles, was designed in the 50's and flew 199 flights well into the 60's.

The Aurora is the rumoured mach 6+ successor of the the SR-71. Some speculate that it was using pulse detonation propulsion but nothing has ever been confirmed. Some say that the program was cancelled as it cost a billion dollars per flight!

The U.S. Government has a history of testing on U.S. Citizens. In fact by LAW they can it is part of United States Code - Title 50 - War And National Defense - Chapter 32 - Chemical And Biological Warefare Program.

Secret Military Experimentation on Americans Was "Legal"

BIOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL TESTING ON HUMAN BEINGS

HISTORY OF SECRET EXPERIMENTATION ON UNITED STATES CITIZENS

If you look there is even more showing this kind of secret testing has been going on for a looong time.
See More

These "insects" are also just another way for the government to ssecretly spy on you, warentless wiretaps wasn't enough. With these things they could "fly" them into your house and see and hear what your are doing/saying while -not- on the phone. Think the government wouldn't do that? What about all the "secret" wiretaps of U.S. Citizens by the NSA - which by the way ins illigal in itself.

How come this link to Aurora has [abovetopsecret.com] appended automatically to it by slashcode, but parent's doesn't?

Forgive me if my link does have the appendage; it didn't in preview.

I was wondering when they'd have an official designation for Aurora.

The problem with conspiracy theorists is they insist on sticking to their theory even when several aspects of it are empirically shown to be false. The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a great example of this.

For example: you say the hijackers were uneducated, but that's demonstrably false. Mohammed Atta, for example, had a Master's degree.

Also, the Boeing 747 is quite a bit larger than the Boeing 757.

As for the Pentagon hit, there was tons of debris, and they DID hit plenty of other things on the way in, including several fences, cars, and a generator.

As for the crack about the "most secure nation on Earth," maybe you missed all the news stories for years after 9/11 about how most of our highest value targets (power plants, water treatment, etc, etc) are still completely open and vulnerable to attack.

So in this case, it's not a conspiracy that can be made to fit the facts, it's a conspiracy that will fit the "facts" that were made up to fit the theory.

If youre new to John Titor, heres the complete archive of his texts:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/the_john_titor _project.html

An interesting interview with Larry Flynt:
http://www.larryflynt.com/notebook.php?id=95

I have my fair deal of scepticism against John Titor and the claims he has traveled from the future to fetch an old IBM machine besides testing the time-machine, but so much that he wrote about in 2000-2001 thereabouts, has in fact come true. These are just the broad ones:
http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

This is yet another drop in this mans pretty hefty prediction bucket. At the time of this link, there were no mentions of black holes being generated in the new smasher, but now it seems that this too will come true (if possible), and very much in the same timeframe as predicted too!
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread124980/p g1

This is the person who even told Hawking was wrong, and later Hawkin conceded he was wrong on the subject!
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum. cgi?noframes;read=165532

Time Traveller The Movie. John Titor doesnt HAVE to be proven correct. WE can DO something about it, starting with ourselves!
http://www.fasttrackproductions.biz/TimeTravel_0.h tml

A site that is covering news in the media and corelating it with Titors predictions:
http://www.johntitor.com/

I dont claim any of this is true, in whatever what you regard as truth, but when reading this, it is startling how accurate the person who wrote those messages in 2000-2001, is describing the trends of our society, problems of the US, Mac Cow Disease, CERN beginning to experiment with mini-black holes, and much more.. For the sake of our planet, and our future, it is worth considering living as THOUGH weve already been through this, than not. He describes a more primitive, but also a more enlightened society if you read the archives from the first link.

If youre new to John Titor, heres the complete archive of his texts:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/the_john_titor _project.html

An interesting interview with Larry Flynt:
http://www.larryflynt.com/notebook.php?id=95

I have my fair deal of scepticism against John Titor and the claims he has traveled from the future to fetch an old IBM machine besides testing the time-machine, but so much that he wrote about in 2000-2001 thereabouts, has in fact come true. These are just the broad ones:
http://johntitor.strategicbrains.com/

This is yet another drop in this mans pretty hefty prediction bucket. At the time of this link, there were no mentions of black holes being generated in the new smasher, but now it seems that this too will come true (if possible), and very much in the same timeframe as predicted too!
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread124980/p g1

This is the person who even told Hawking was wrong, and later Hawkin conceded he was wrong on the subject!
http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.net/cgi-bin/forum. cgi?noframes;read=165532

Time Traveller The Movie. John Titor doesnt HAVE to be proven correct. WE can DO something about it, starting with ourselves!
http://www.fasttrackproductions.biz/TimeTravel_0.h tml

A site that is covering news in the media and corelating it with Titors predictions:
http://www.johntitor.com/

I dont claim any of this is true, in whatever what you regard as truth, but when reading this, it is startling how accurate the person who wrote those messages in 2000-2001, is describing the trends of our society, problems of the US, Mac Cow Disease, CERN beginning to experiment with mini-black holes, and much more.. For the sake of our planet, and our future, it is worth considering living as THOUGH weve already been through this, than not. He describes a more primitive, but also a more enlightened society if you read the archives from the first link.

"Why people are fighting is more important than what they are fighting with." - John Titor

A motivated group with little weaponry will always triumph over an unmotivated group with lots of weaponry. Witness Iraq today, or the upcoming Civil War II of the USA tomorrow:

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread61544/pg 1

It's a long read but may just open your eyes a little more on what is, in all likelihood, coming.