The Waterboy Again

Whatever happened to Kevin Ryan's claims to expertise because he was a water tester who worked for Underwriter's Laboratories? Now he's off on Flight 77:

Exactly how was Flight 77 hijacked, considering, among other things, that the alleged hijackers were said to be identified as security risks (possibly linked to al Qaeda) when they tried to board, and were not physically imposing (all 5 and a half feet tall or less, and slender in build)?[1]

They weren't identified as possibly linked to al Qaeda; they set off metal detectors as Kevin would know if he read his own footnotes:

When they go through, their carry-on bags fail to set off any alarms, but both men set off the alarm when they pass through the first metal detector. They are directed to a second metal detector, where Almihdhar passes, but Moqed fails again. He is subjected to a personal screening with a metal detection hand wand. This time he is cleared and permitted to pass through the checkpoint.

As for the second part of his question, I'll make him a deal. I'll get four men with knifes and box cutters to guard the entrance to a tunnel and if Kevin can get past them and into the tunnel, we'll consider his argument valid. In reality, of course, Kevin's underwear will end up brown and he won't get anywhere near the tunnel.

Why was Dick Cheney tracking Flight 77?[2]

He wasn't; he (or rather a young military man in the PEOC with him) was tracking the possible location of Flight 93, had it not crashed already.

Why did the roof of the Pentagon collapse 30 minutes after impact, giving additional evidence for the use of explosives? Note: The use of explosives at the Pentagon seems to be in agreement with the use of a large plane, which would have had little penetrating power.

Additional evidence? What was the initial evidence? And on what basis do you know that a large plane would have had little penetrating power?

Ryan also goes into the idiotic speculation about Barbara Olsen's phone calls:

Why was the official explanation for alleged phone calls made by Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olsen changed several times, and ultimately how could Ted Olsen’s story make any sense?[7]

Before closing with his real point:

Why are these questions NOT being pursued by independent investigators? That’s because the attention of many potential investigators has been hijacked by the much less useful question of “What hit the Pentagon.” This is certainly the favorite subject of intentional disruptors and official story supporters.

You know, Kevin, I'm sure you think you're helping your cause with these buffoonish posts, but you're not. He relates an anecdote:

A great example was when 9/11 Commission staffer Miles Kara and I exchanged messages a few months ago. He had written to my local group in an inquiry seeking support for his positions. My response was apparently not to his liking, and he therefore sought something in my own work that could be criticized. Despite the fact that the vast majority of my 9/11 work has centered on the World Trade Center, Army intelligence officer Kara searched through my articles and presentations over the last seven years and chose one minor statement I made about the Pentagon, in March 2006.

And so, in response, you do a longer post on the Pentagon? Oh, let's not talk about what hit the Pentagon, because that dishonors the memory of the passengers on Flight 77. Instead, let's talk about Barbara Olsen's phone calls, because that's much less likely to get people pissed off about what a bunch of morons we are.

Really?

But of course the responses are where the usual dingbat nonsense comes up. One dolt even brings up the Clock Lady's evidence of two Pentagon clocks that stopped at 9:32. Inside job!