1. Bmead

    Bmead Member

    Here you go
    fbi.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2014
  2. Bmead

    Bmead Member

    Apparently it may be used in a legal proceeding or at least such is my understanding of the code and code list they sent me.
    Which means anyway, there is more than just what is publicly available. So it is a case of waiting.
     
  3. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    The letter specifically states it should not be taken as an indication that something exists. It's just a standard disclaimer that regardless of if the requested records exist or not, they would be exempt from the FOIA - basically because they are police records.

    So this is not evidence of anything.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Bmead

    Bmead Member


    Well that is a side step isn't it. Let's look at it, there exists files in the public domain. I request some files, and they say the files i request are exempt from disclosure because of......
    Ok we can take the standard this doesn't mean they do it doesn't mean they don't (which most things not given have attached especially highly classified items, it is an executive order which allows them the right to refuse to answer whether anything even does exist or not-that executive order does not apply to things that are not of a sensitive nature)
    Now that letter does say that the are excluded based on a section that is relevant to items used in legal proceedings. So something that may not exist may need to be exempt from release in case what doesn't exist may need to not be used in a court case?

    I think the logic here says that even if the remaining files are simply a few basic reports similar to what is available already, they may contain names of agents/officers, there is something there.

    But i won't argue this point, i will simply be more specific in my next request. To see if i can get a different response.
    In my view they could have said, no file exists, they could have said exempt for other reasons.
    And lest we forget, there HAS to be other files.
    The files i specifically asked for were the Nypd,jttf and fbi ones of the reports required to be made by each person who handled them. The fbi would have to have such things or a copy of. As well the fact it is a requirement of each officer to do so. I do not know a single court of law where the evidence can be submitted and said, Officer Smith gave this to Agent Smith and that was on Some day in January, trust us, oh then Smith gave it to Agent Jones.
    Each person who handled them has to make a report. Has to log it in evidence books and so on.

    My next request will have to focus on something specific about the passport condition. Or the reports of who recovered it.
    I think we both know there IS more there, whether it is useful or not is another matter but certainly to say no more files exist is only saying that the passport got handed in and no one recorded that, then they gave a quick call to Chin to get his story and that was it case closed everything made public nothing more to see.
     
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  5. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    It's just a standard exclusion. Doesn't mean anything.

    Can you post the text of your request?
     
  6. Bmead

    Bmead Member

    I don't want to put the entire e-mail up but this is what i asked for
    the forensic examination report, the report of the officer who handed it in, the copy of the reports of both the NYPD and the JTTF including reports by all officers/agents who handled the document and detailed its condition or anything else concerned with it.


    That may be as you say a "standard exclusion"
    However we are both aware that the whole have we/haven't we thing means yes we have. The reason to provide a refusal to acknowledge existence or lack of, is due to the fact confirmation of a lack of something could very easily be confirming that something that SHOULD exist doesn't which would be a serious issue. Also saying we do not have xxx also could potentially exclude sources and thereby reveal others. But this is not a low level exclusionary statement. It is applied to matters of extreme classification or relevance.
    However they HAVE admitted something exists. The it does/doesn't is noted at the bottom but the first line says the item you requested is located in an investigative file. So that says it does exist.

    I do not see a logic that explains-
    The thing you asked for is in that file there but you can't see it because......maybe we have it maybe we don't

    Like i said, the contents may be total crap. However as i see you didn't disagree you must i assume concur that they should at least be some reports by each department person who handled it
     
  7. WayPastVNE

    WayPastVNE New Member

    I am the waypastvne who originally posted the passport? photo over at ATS. I first saw it in the NIST photo archives.

    I found the Richard Wozniak testimonial at the JREF site. My personal opinion of the testimonial is it is legit. Have any of you contacted Richard and asked him about it ? You have his email address. I have not tried to contact him, Wouldn't want to bother him with it. I did however research him about a year and a half ago. He is a real person, he does work for AIG, he would have been in the area on 9/11 and his account does fit the evidence. He fits the police description, 30's clean cut, well dressed. If this guy was seeking attention he would have posted it more than once and not on some christian forum. If you don't like his writing style... That's to bad. The thing I find most convincing is where he said he found the passport. That is the general area where it should have landed.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
  8. WayPastVNE

    WayPastVNE New Member

    This reply is a little off topic. I would have liked to post it in The Satam al Suqami Passport thread but that thread is closed. This is new to the subject. Maybe the thread could be reopened and this moved to that thread.

    I can do that, It's easy. There is a large factor you are leaving out when you imagine the impact. That is: The airplane had air inside of it, a large amount of air. The fuselage of a 767 contains 19500 cu/ft of air. 19500 cu/ft of air at sea level would have a mass weight of just under 1500 pounds and for AA11 it would be traveling at 600 fps. That is a lot of inertia. It is not going to just stop when the plane hits the building. It's going to keep going and it will go through or around any thing that is in its way. It will also CARRY items with it such as life vest, seat cushions and even passports. Please note that the air and the passport were both traveling 600 fps at time of impact and both decelerated together once outside the building. That is how the passport made it through the building undamaged.
    [​IMG]

    Do I have any evidence to back this up... Yes. When UA 175 went through the south tower the air from the fuselage was the first thing out the other side of the building, It left a visible telltale condensation trail (a drop in pressure causing moisture to briefly condensate ) in its wake. This trail can be seen in many of the photos and videos taken that day.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The first photo is a composite showing the alignment of the fuselage with the contrail before and after impact, the rest point out the contrail. The trail extends out of the building aprx. 200 ft.( the width of the building ) For the north tower this would place the passport somewhere in the yellow area at an altitude of about 900 ft at that point the wind would take over and the passport would drift with it.

    [​IMG]

    From 900ft it would be easy for the passport to drift through the mist of jet fuel, all the way to Albany st.
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2014
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Pete Tar

    Pete Tar Moderator Staff Member

    That's a pretty interesting observation, I don't think that's ever been pointed out before.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

    I have personally seen the post, and the video, by a person who online goes by "WayPastVne" (spelling varies), and have found these suggestions very, very compelling to engage as possibilities.

    (I welcome member "waypastvne", BTW!!)

    Sidebar: The content of the pressurized cabin of a modern airliner (such as the B767, for instance) cannot be easily discounted. Fluid dynamics, and gases are considered a 'fluid'. Perhaps there are engineers or experts in these related fields who could chime in??

    EDIT: For pilots, the term Vne is well understood....as applies to smaller airplanes, but not to Transport Category designs....(but, this has been covered in much detail, elsewhere).
     
    Last edited: Apr 1, 2014
  11. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    The account reads exactly as I would expect a fundemantalist Christian to phrase it. I once belonged to a Baptist church.

    The details described however, strike me as quite odd. Its a hero's tale ( in his own mind) and, IMHO, at the very least its embellished.
    NYPD detective vs. FBI? Both would be plain clothes but an FBI agent gives the author more cache.
     
  12. WeedWhacker

    WeedWhacker Senior Member

  13. jaydeehess

    jaydeehess Senior Member

    Yes, when I first selected this thread my tablet showed only a few posts. After I posted I noticed its two pages. Don't know what happened.
     
  14. Ronald Wieck

    Ronald Wieck New Member

    This is an obvious question, but has anyone asked Detective Yuk Chin if Wozniak is the guy who handed him Suqami's passport?
     
  15. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I tried to contact him via Facebook to see what he remembers, he did not respond.
     
  16. Ronald Wieck

    Ronald Wieck New Member

    All very curious. It would appear as though the question is a simple yes-or-no one.
     
  17. Mick West

    Mick West Administrator Staff Member

    I doubt he even got my message, he's been inactive on FB for a couple of years.
     
  18. tadaaa

    tadaaa Active Member

    Off topic I know - but in the context of this site, that did make me smile
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. Ronald Wieck

    Ronald Wieck New Member

    I just tried sending him a message, but my expectations are low.
     
  20. WayPastVNE

    WayPastVNE New Member

    Last edited: Sep 8, 2018
  21. deirdre

    deirdre Moderator Staff Member

    Hiro's FLicker Photo Journal that includes your pic (and a pic verifying location, as the location looks different today) is here.

    Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/hiro_oshima/127765131/in/album-72057594105816396/


    I'm linking to the first pic in his journal though as he gives his own testimony of events. I don't know when he uploaded the pics (first comment says 12 years) and wrote his text.
     
  22. WayPastVNE

    WayPastVNE New Member

    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2018
  23. WayPastVNE

    WayPastVNE New Member

    Last edited: Sep 8, 2018