Med osman
Re: Flt 77
Thu Jul 3 15:32:24 2003
208.152.73.123

------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Flt 77
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 07:28:33 -0700
From: "Med Osman"
Reply-To: "Med Osman" medfly1@cox.net
To:

Thank you for your response. I am referring to an article from www.rense.com  , which was in your July 2nd. I have seen it before and found out that the only picture of the wheel rim comes from an Argentinan website of some sort.

Besides, where is the rest of the wheels assembly which is like a truck, and those things don't just pulverize.

If it really was a 757, I bet money to doughnuts that most of the aircraft, aft of the wing would have been sitting outside the Pentagon in the parking lot. But it wasn't a 757 that hit the Pentagon.

Besides I found in another article investigating eye witness accounts, that all eye witnesses that were reported seeing a 757 could not be tracked and were bogus names, that's why I changed my mind about this whole thing, because those who are responsible for investigating and giving us, the public, information on what happened, are telling things that don't add up.

Now here is another one for you since you have experience salvaging airplanes. Those 4 airplanes involved in 9/11 had a total of 8 black boxes, 2 each. They all failed in the crash, except for the one in Pennsylvania, which was "shot down" I assume, and that's another story. Blackboxes are designed to take anything short of a nuclear blast, as high of a g-load as imaginable in a crash and must pass stringent fire tests to make sure that investigators can find out the reasons of a crash to prevent it from happening again. I remember reading about the AA 757 that slammed in a mountain during an approach in Bogota I think, 3 years ago, and the magazine, Flying that is, had a complete transcript of the conversation between the pilot and the first officer. The blackboxes and the CVR survived the crash and the ensuing fire, so what else is new.

How come there has never been any ADs against those black boxes manufacturers? In my mind, the reason is simple and that is they would have to turn them over to the manufacturers for root cause analysis and corrective action, which in turn might show that these boxes were probably tampered with, or they might be able to identify the voices of the real perpetrators, who might not turn to be Arabs after all, since none of the passengers mentioned anything about the hi-jackers having an accent or being of different complexion, and the stewardess of Flt. 11 named which passengers at which seats carried out this crime. This leads me to believe they were like the rest of us.

At the end, there are a lot of clues in this whole thing suggesting foul play of some sort, and the truth might be ugly, and I'll leave it at that.

Thank you for your response, and I really enjoy the articles you send. Keep up the good work.

Med Osman



----- Original Message -----
From: American Patriot Friends Network
To: Med Osman
Cc: apfn@apfn.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: Flt 77

Which article are you talking about....?

have you review APFN - FLIGHT 77 web page...

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flight77.htm

I agree with everything you have said.... Way back in 1957 to 1961.... I salvage
over 250 crash airplanes... so I know what a crash looks like!

also, you may want to look at
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/wtc.htm

also many posting on APFN msg board...
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/Indices/149495.html

You can search the net and fill hundreds of add'l info...

Now what?

Med Osman wrote:
Your article on Flt 77 and the accompanying pictures are really a poor duping job.

First of all, airplanes hit buildings in the past and mountains, but never pulverized and disappeared in thin air.

Case and point, in the 40's I am not exactly sure what year, but a B-25 Mitchell bomber hit the Empire state building and most of the tail section was sticking out of the building. In the case of Flt. 77, only one ring of the Pentagon was hit, which can be at the most say 50 feet wide, so where did the rest of the 180 feet fuselage go which includes the tail section.

Furthermore, there are two 12,ooo pound engines dangling from each wing on each side of the fuselage, which are solid metal runnig at several thousand rpm, with plenty of fuel around, at least 30,000 gallons of kerosene. Where did all of that go? You can't physically squeeze the fuselage and the engines in the demolished area of the first ring that was demolished due to impact and the ensuing explosion.

The picture of a wheel rim doesn't mean anything, where are the rest of the wheels, besides the aircraft did not have the landing gears down, otherwise the damage along the path would have been staggering let alone the possibility of cartwheeling, which did not happen. It is obvious that the picture of one rim was implanted.

The other problem posed by Flt 77 is the fact that the light posts in the parking area in front of the building and in the flight path were not hit by the aircraft which was supposedly flying nap of the earth.

In my opinion, and I have seen a few wreckage sites of airplanes, it is impossible that the Pentagon could have been hit by an airplane the size of a Boeing 757, something close to a half a million pound loaded with fuel. The Pentagon must have been hit by a cruise missile painted like an American Airliner.

How were the passengers killed? Definitely elsewhere but not at the Pentagon crash site. The problem here is that all the investigation is kept under wraps using national security as an excuse, which is ludicrous, because national security has to do with managing to infiltrate the security system at the airports, flying for more than an hour without being intercepted by our fighters, compromising our defense system, these are areas of national security that require classification. But a commercial airliner crashinto a building, is the jog of aviation expert and the NTSB should have been involved in all four crashes. However the NTSB was barred from the crash sites under the excuse of national security, which is unjustifiable unless somebody has something to hide and professional investigation by experts will expose the weaknesses of the official party line.

I hate to say this, but all of 9/11 remind me of the high profile assassinations of the 60's starting with JFK's assassination and the Warren Commission controversial report, which up to this day has not earned neither the respect nor credibility of researchers of JFK's assassination.

I hope I am wrong in my assessment, but I have been in a state of denial for a while but it just doesn't add up.

Med osman