Flight 77. How far off the ground was it

[roundhead]

At impact with the Pentagon.

The official narrative seems to be that the plane hit the building on a flat trajectory on the first floor, correct.

I just would like some of the experts on here who are familiar with the plane, to show how high the nose of the plane is compared to the bottom of the engines.And to impact as low on the building as it did, how that compares to the "height" of the plane from nose to bottom of engines

TIA

[DavidJames]

At impact with the Pentagon.

The official narrative seems to be that the plane hit the building on a flat trajectory on the first floor, correct.

I just would like some of the experts on here who are familiar with the plane, to show how high the nose of the plane is compared to the bottom of the engines.And to impact as low on the building as it did, how that compares to the "height" of the plane from nose to bottom of engines

TIAI'm curious.
Why do you want to know?
What do you hope to accomplish?
How will you interpret and analyze the information and based on what qualifications?

[roundhead]

I'm curious.
Why do you want to know?
What do you hope to accomplish?
How will you interpret and analyze the information and based on what qualifications?


I have read in several places that the bottoms of the engines would have to literally have been plowing the ground, for the plane to have hit the first floor, due to the "height" from bottom of engines to top of plane.

It interested me enough, that i wanted somebody to show how this must not be possible, as the engines left no discernable "tracks" leading up to the impact point that i am aware of.

Myabe somebody knows what height the first floor was, and what height there is between the bottom of the engines and the top of the plane.

[Dumb All Over]

I just would like some of the experts on here who are familiar with the plane, to show how high the nose of the plane is compared to the bottom of the engines.And to impact as low on the building as it did, how that compares to the "height" of the plane from nose to bottom of engines

TIA
Surely there must be an easy way for you to do this bit of homework yourself?

[HeyLeroy]

There's this great resource called "the internet" that you can use to do your own research.

Try it, it's cool!

[JimBenArm]

I heard the altitude was somewhere between the ground and the top of the building. Don't remember where I heard it. Could have been fortheloveofgodnotanothernoplanerthread.com, but I can't remember.

[dtugg]

Since I am in a good mood today.

http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/jetliner/b757/b757_schem_01.gif

Now go ahead and continue making a fool of yourself for our amusement, roundhead.

[beachnut]

Why can’t those ignorant on 911 issues look up this stuff? Start the clock.

77 impacted at the junction of the first floor and the second floor.

77 impacted in a descent, a downward angle.

911Truth continues to wander the world; zombies spreading bad information to fool the uniformed who are inspired not to research, but ask questions and support the movement pronounced brain-dead 11 September 2001.

[roundhead]

I assume by the remarks thus far you guys agree with my thoughts, which are that the plane should have damaged the second and perhaps 3rd floors, were the engines even 10 feet off the ground at impact.

[Dog Town]

I assume by the remarks thus far you guys agree with my thoughts...

In typical twoofer fashion, you suck at this! Bravo!

[roundhead]

Why can’t those ignorant on 911 issues look up this stuff? Start the clock.

77 impacted at the junction of the first floor and the second floor.

77 impacted in a descent, a downward angle.

911Truth continues to wander the world; zombies spreading bad information to fool the uniformed who are inspired not to research, but ask questions and support the movement pronounced brain-dead 11 September 2001.

How tall is a floor there??

It appears from what a previous poster posted, that there is roughly 40 feet from the bottom of the plane to the tailfin. And that doesnt account for however far off the ground the plane was flying at impact.

I see no pre collapse damage that looks more than even roughly 20 feet tall(from the ground).as opposed to 40/50 feet, even if the plane was literally just above the ground.

[beachnut]

I assume by the remarks thus far you guys agree with my thoughts, which are that the plane should have damaged the second and perhaps 3rd floors, were the engines even 10 feet off the ground at impact.

The left wing passed below the second-floor slab, and the right wing crossed at a shallow angle from below the secondfloor
slab to above the second-floor slab...

http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

http://www.asce.org/pressroom/news/display_press.cfm?uid=1282

The plane is only 12 feet for the fuselage (like wide and tall); you could look this up. See engines, see fuselage, see wings. See statement at top.

Read the report? Why did it take less than 15 minutes to post the report? Why are your questions based on hearsay?

[16.5]

At impact with the Pentagon.

The official narrative seems to be that the plane hit the building on a flat trajectory on the first floor, correct.

I just would like some of the experts on here who are familiar with the plane, to show how high the nose of the plane is compared to the bottom of the engines.And to impact as low on the building as it did, how that compares to the "height" of the plane from nose to bottom of engines

TIA

The fuselage is 12.5 feet, the engines are at most seven feet.

So assume the engines were hanging off the bottom of the plane (they were not) and the maximum distance is about 13 feet.

Eyeballing it, I'd say less than 10 feet.

There's your answer so run along back to pfffft you rascal!

[johnny karate]

roundhead, if you have any doubts that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, would not the word of the hundreds of eye witnesses, first responders, and crash scene investigators be enough to belay your doubts?

Or is that you think all of them are cowards who've been coerced into complicity in the same way you think the FDNY was (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[dtugg]

Wow, that is amazing roundhead! You've proved that 9/11 was an inside job using your amazing intellect and suburb photo analysis and aircraft accident investigative skills! What are you going to do with this amazing finding? I think you should send it to KSM's lawyers (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=134695). He is looking at the death penalty, you know. What? You prefer to just JAQoff in the internet rather than actually do something. Well, I am shocked!

[Bobert]

RH and the CIT CULT are like defense attorneys trying to get their clients (flight 77 terrorists) a not guilty verdict.
Like some defense attorneys (well maybe like .00000001%) they will throw out the wildest of fantasies to save their clients.
OBL thanks you RH!
You are doing your masters work.

[Bobert]

roundhead, if you have any doubts that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, would not the word of the hundreds of eye witnesses, first responders, and crash scene investigators be enough to belay your doubts?

Or is that you think all of them are cowards who've been coerced into complicity in the same way you think the FDNY was (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?
I think what is happening is Roundhead wants his name on the next CIT CULT SMOKING GUN movie.

[Caustic Logic]

Flight 77. How far off the ground was it. At impact with the Pentagon.

The official narrative seems to be that the plane hit the building on a flat trajectory on the first floor, correct.

Close - it was in a slight dive but at the very end had an overall above ground level under fuselage about 5-6 feet IIRC. All analyses you'll get are approximations but a certain narrow range is discoverable and consistent with all evidence. The ASCE came up with this, which is not the best approximation.
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/L_Engine_underground.jpg
IMO they have a little more tilt than was real, and it's at least two or three feet too low. Plane was titled. Left engine, lowest point, dep., on exact topography a foot or two to 0 inches off the ground.
It impacted the ground and ground-level structures here:
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2008/01/vent-structure-damage.html
Engine didn't burrow halfway into the foundation but did nick it good:
http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/12/pentagon-foundation-damage.html

Here is the overall approach right afterwards:
http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/NEIT749_frontarea_labeled.jpg
[original photo (http://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q62/chainsawmoth/FrustratingFraud/NEIT749_100-0028.jpg)]
Where the tailfin and upper fuselage entered the second floor - outer wall and outer part of floor slab, were removed. The upper tailfin would have been severed by intact 3rd floor slab, at the latest (last thing to hit). No damage of importance should be expected higher than that.

This does not answer your question, does it? Would anything?

[roundhead]

roundhead, if you have any doubts that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, would not the word of the hundreds of eye witnesses, first responders, and crash scene investigators be enough to belay your doubts?

Or is that you think all of them are cowards who've been coerced into complicity in the same way you think the FDNY was (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

I have no doubt it didnt crash into the Pentacon.

Most "eyewitnesses" have been discredited as having actually "witnessed" any actual impact. This has been more than hashed out over and over.In fact the scores of witnesses to an impact has been entirely discredited as revisionist history.(On here and elsewhere, by people who have asked them specifically what they did and didnt see, and from what vantage point.

The only real "group" of people who have been independantly verified as telling the same story all along, and recorded on location as having made these claims are the NOC witnesses.A large group all reading out of the same simple hymn book.Extremely compelling evidence.

1. Guy "flying" 77 who couldnt even pass the sniff test controlling a Cessna just before 9/11.He is going to fly a jet the likes of which he has never sat in hundreds of miles, level it off, clip poles, and ram it into a building a ground level...lol..where do you people come up with such fantastic stories
2. The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.
Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.


Lol...

3. The "evaporation" of video footage showing(or more correctly, not showing)impact from 77 into the Pentagon.

3. The absurdity of a supposedly well planned operation doing its best to cause the least amount of damage to the Pentagon, and flying through a forest of obstacles to do so.
4. The lack of airplane debris recovered at the site.
5.The fact the damage to the building doesnt fit with an airliner crash
6. Those darn NOC witnesses who dont place 77 where the Govt says it was.

I am sure i could think of more reasons to be super sceptical of the OCT regarding the Pentagon, but the above are plenty enough.

Added to this whole mix is the fact the OCT is being promulgated by a known liar, so that certainly gives even less credence to their side of the story.

[DGM]

I have no doubt it didnt crash into the Pentacon.
[cut BS]
.
So what actually happened? You've had 7.5 years, tell us oh brilliant one.

[DGM]

Counting down to "I don't know, that's why we need an independent investigation" in 3.....2....1....

[Bobert]

LOL RH is trying to score CIT CULT member, Employee of the month.
If he gets that he gets to add those really cool fire racing stripes to his bigwheel.
OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE places flight 77 CRASHING INTO THE PENTAGON.
So no-planer tell us WHAT PROOF you have that Flight 77 didnt SMASH INTO THE PENTAGON like the OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE indicates?
Watching the CIT CULT is like watching a circus.
Every few weeks they return to JREF with a different clown riding in the same tired old clown car.

[roundhead]

So what actually happened? You've had 7.5 years, tell us oh brilliant one.

I think CIT has it mighty close.

Considering the Govt has the keys to the swimming pool, its mighty hard to get wet.


If the govt obeyed every request for any information i wanted regarding 9/11, i or anybody that cared to could solve this whole riddle in days, at most.It wont ever happen.

But when the perpetrator of the crime holds the keys, its mighty tough to get completely to the bottom of everything.
There must be some truth to this, because the perps dont want us the people to see squat, pretty darn mean spirited, if you ask me.

[johnny karate]

I have no doubt it didnt crash into the Pentacon.

Most "eyewitnesses" have been discredited as having actually "witnessed" any actual impact. This has been more than hashed out over and over.In fact the scores of witnesses to an impact has been entirely discredited as revisionist history.

At yet none of these people, nor the hundreds of first responders and crash scene investigators who witnessed and identified the wreckage, have come forward to support your theory.

You've already branded the FDNY as cowards coerced into covering up the murder of 343 of their own (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164). Do you ascribe this same character flaw to ever single person present at the Pentagon on 9/11?

[DGM]

I think CIT has it mighty close
That the plane hit the building? That's all their witnesses can agree on. Besides, what actually is their hypothesis? (hint , they don't have one)

[johnny karate]

I think CIT has it mighty close

I'm not familiar with the version of events CIT has come up with. Does it incorporate your theory of firefighter cowardice (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[Tweeter]

At yet none of these people, nor the hundreds of first responders and crash scene investigators who witnessed and identified the wreckage, have come forward to support your theory.

You've already branded the FDNY as cowards coerced into covering up the murder of 343 of their own (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164). Do you ascribe this same character flaw to ever single person present at the Pentagon on 9/11?

If all these people witnessed a plane hitting why was the first report of an explosion. Why didnt they say another plane hit?

[DGM]

If all these people witnessed a plane hitting why was the first report of an explosion. Why didnt they say another plane hit?
They did. Didn't your mommy tell you that. Those of us that watched it live knew this.

[Bobert]

If all these people witnessed a plane hitting why was the first report of an explosion. Why didnt they say another plane hit?
Tweeter,
Have you viewed EVERY video that the CIT CULT has, "produced"?
Just as an FYI you CANNOT comment on the CIT CULT unless you have.

[roundhead]

That the plane hit the building? That's all their witnesses can agree on. Besides, what actually is their hypothesis? (hint , they don't have one)

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place

[DGM]

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place
Your high!

Seek help.

Please spell out what they claimed happened (and how). (hint. they don't)

ALL (almost anyway) of their witnesses claim the plane hit the building Are you denying this?

[johnny karate]

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum.

You're certainly an expert on fear. Like when you so expertly pointed out what fearful cowards the FDNY are (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164).

[16.5]

Hee hee, another CIT shill.

I got to hand it to them though, their crack research abilities led us all to 13 witnesses each testifying that the plane hit the Pentagon. A large group all reading out of the same simple hymn book. Extremely compelling evidence.

Hey Round, CIT claims to have interviewed Probst, when will they releasing that information, and the other unedited videos they rely upon? It is awful hard for us debunkers to get to the bottom of this.
But when the perpetrator of the coverup holds the keys, its mighty tough to get completely to the bottom of everything.
There must be some truth to this, because the CIT's dont want us the people to see squat, pretty darn mean spirited, if you ask me.

/Cult? I don't call it a Cult. I call it the treefort kids, with Aldo standing in for Porky and Craig standing in for Alfalfa.

[johnny karate]

If all these people witnessed a plane hitting why was the first report of an explosion. Why didnt they say another plane hit?

Maybe they were firefighters. You know what unreliable witnesses they make (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=3681134#post3681134).

[bonavada]

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC,

ya got yer compass upside down there fellah.

BV

[Mangoose]

What are you talking about? Officer Richard Cox from the Columbia Pike, Officer William Lagasse from the CITGO station, and Alan Wallace from the Pentagon grounds all radioed immediately after the crash to report the 757 headed to the Pentagon and/or crashing into it. David Winslow from Pentagon City called the AP within minutes to tell them that he witnessed the tail of a jumbo jet plough into the Pentagon. Those were the first reports of those at the scene.

[DGM]

ya got yer compass upside down there fellah.

BV
I noticed that too (SOC) but didn't want to hurt his little feelings.:D

[dtugg]

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place

There are not enough laugh dogs in the world for this. But I'll try.

:dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl:
:dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl:
:dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl: :dl:

Damn, only 30 are allowed. It's not nearly enough.

Us afraid of CIT? Them owning us? Seriously? Come on. Those idiots are the joke of a movement that is a joke. The fringe of the fringe of the fringe. Some of the biggest morons in the world. You can guess where that puts you since you are one of the very few people in the world that believe them.

I promise you that nobody here is afraid of the Complete Idiot Team. We laugh at them. I actually miss Craig, it is too bad that he got banned again. His posts are some of the funniest crap ever. Literally.

[jaydeehess]

If all these people witnessed a plane hitting why was the first report of an explosion. Why didnt they say another plane hit?

I was watching the news coverage that day live as it came in and the first report I experienced was that another plane had hit the Pentagon. that is my first hand experience of the 'first reports', where'd you get your info?

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

Disregarding your inadvertant mistake, I daresay no one here is afraid in the least of the CiT or their contentions. Perhaps there is some valid consternation concerning the stability of Aldo and PfT leader Balsamo given their penchance to violent expression. I am leery of the street people who walk down the sidewalk protesting strongly to unseen enemies as well.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

Well for me personally I consider Scientology a cult. They have some beliefs about the beginnings of life on Earth that are patently ridiculous yet manage to actually adhere to those beliefs even given the complete and utter lack of evidence for them.
Same applies to the 'flyover' contention of the CiT. No one at all, from any angle, at any place, claims to have seen the plane that approached the Pentagon low and fast fly over the building as a fireball erupted from the building. No one at all RH, none, nada, zip, zilch, there is no evidence whatsoever to back up this core contention of the CiT. thus those who continue to adhere to belief in this fantasy are displaying the characteristics of a cult follower.

The CiT IS a 'no-planer' group. They claim that the aircraft generally acceted as having hit the Pentagon did not do so and that the damage was caused by some other method. In that way they believe exactly as the WTC no-planers do.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place

One of the more recent forays was by Turbofan. He claimed that FDR flash memory cannot have its data corrupted or erased. He sought out experts in the feild, found them, they then established mechanisms by which it doers occur along with some specific examples. He then proceeded to argue, misrepresent their words, misunderstand their words and generally discount the very experts he had originally sought out and in the process make an utter fool of himself. He then trundled off to the PfT forums and claimed victory. He was taken to school here yet cannot bring himself to recognize that fact.

[tfk]

Roundhead,


I have no doubt it didnt crash into the Pentacon.

Most "eyewitnesses" have been discredited as having actually "witnessed" any actual impact. This has been more than hashed out over and over.In fact the scores of witnesses to an impact has been entirely discredited as revisionist history.(On here and elsewhere, by people who have asked them specifically what they did and didnt see, and from what vantage point.

The only real "group" of people who have been independantly verified as telling the same story all along, and recorded on location as having made these claims are the NOC witnesses.A large group all reading out of the same simple hymn book.Extremely compelling evidence.

1. Guy "flying" 77 who couldnt even pass the sniff test controlling a Cessna just before 9/11.He is going to fly a jet the likes of which he has never sat in hundreds of miles, level it off, clip poles, and ram it into a building a ground level...lol..where do you people come up with such fantastic stories
2. The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.
Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.

Lol...

3. The "evaporation" of video footage showing(or more correctly, not showing)impact from 77 into the Pentagon.

3. The absurdity of a supposedly well planned operation doing its best to cause the least amount of damage to the Pentagon, and flying through a forest of obstacles to do so.
4. The lack of airplane debris recovered at the site.
5.The fact the damage to the building doesnt fit with an airliner crash
6. Those darn NOC witnesses who dont place 77 where the Govt says it was.

I am sure i could think of more reasons to be super sceptical of the OCT regarding the Pentagon, but the above are plenty enough.

Added to this whole mix is the fact the OCT is being promulgated by a known liar, so that certainly gives even less credence to their side of the story.


Aw, shucks guy.

I was about to provide you with a reference that showed you the flight path altitude above the ground.

Then you quoted the standard crappola (no debris, impact hole size, couldn't fly a Cessna, lying witnesses) that has been proven unquestionably nonsense years ago. But that's OK. I'd still help.

Then you got all smarmy and insulting to those (like me) who disagree with you. Which I have come to expect from Twoofers. No big problem there either.

But then you got all insulting to those, like the pilots, who died that day. All full of little boy testosterone about what YOU would have done, with your 20/20 hindsight, etc.

And that ended my inclination to help you in the slightest.

Good luck finding your info. I have every confidence that, if you ever do find it, you'll misunderstand & misrepresent the daylights out of it.

tom

PS. I will tell you this, tho. Your stated assumptions about the altitude above the ground are - oh what a non-surprise - wrong.

PPS. Your stated assumptions about the damage that can be done with a "little plastic box cutter", with a steel razor-sharp knife, are equally ludicrous. The first cut could lay you open most of the way to your spinal column. They could certainly slice thru your trachea, esophagus, both carotid arteries, all 5 jugular veins, and the vagus nerve. It'll take you a couple of minutes to bleed out, but you'll go unconscious in about 8 seconds or so.

Callous jerk...

[BenBurch]

Low enough to strike a lamp pole and then objects on the ground with the engines...

Very flat as these things go.

[BenBurch]

BTW, I studied knife combat. If you think you are safe around me when I have nothing but a box cutter, you're insane.

[jaydeehess]

We laugh at them. I actually miss Craig, it is too bad that he got banned again. His posts are some of the funniest crap ever. Literally

While I have been attempting to be more decorus in my responses to TM's I have no choice but to agree with your sentence.

[DavidJames]

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.Do you know who really has fear. CIT has fear. Do you know they have done NOTHING to bring their "evidence" to anyone who can actually do anything?

CIT has not contacted lawyers.
CIT has not contacted the mainstream media.
CIT has not contacted the police
CIT has not contacted insurance fraud investigators.
CIT has not contacted DA's.

CIT is afraid to vet their "evidence" to anyone who can expose it as the fraud it is.

CIT, like you and the other 9/11 CT losers, is an Internet phenomenon only.

You and your loser friends are afraid of the light of day. Turn off the Internet and POOF you and your loser friends are gone.

[jaydeehess]

BTW, I studied knife combat. If you think you are safe around me when I have nothing but a box cutter, you're insane.

I did not take any knife training but one of my first jobs involved using a boxcutter on a daily basis. I can attest to their sufficiency to inflict major physical damage especially to persons belted into a seat with no easy way to move or defend themselves.

It is a KNIFE, an extremly sharp knife. What it lacks in blade length it makes up for in sharpness.
The job I had was stocking grocery shelves ( and it was 35 years ago) and we used the knives to cut the tops off the boxes. On more than one occassion tin cans were punctured by a incorrectly placed boxcutter and a stocker in a hurray.

[johnny karate]

Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.

First the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164).

Now the Flight 77 pilots.

Is there anyone roundhead won't paint as a coward to try and wedge his warped delusions into reality?

[16.5]

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place

Oh man! Hilarious! Freaking CIT came here predebunked: their witnesses all say the plane hit the pentagon.

Those NoPlane jokers are incompetent. Here is a little thing I like to do: just replace NoC with "hit the Pentagon" in every thing they post (well not when fat aldo claims that people are traitors and ask that they be banned).

"13 corroborated scientific type forensic witnesses corroborate the fact the the plane flew NoC hit the Pentagon."

It is FUN and completely accurate.

[Mr.Herbert]

Why oh why do you guys allow yourselves to get sucked into yet another idiotic flyover thread?

[jaydeehess]

"13 corroborated scientific type forensic witnesses corroborate the fact the the plane flew NoC hit the Pentagon."

It is FUN and completely accurate.

Especially given that for some of CiT's supposed NoC witnesses they have to explain how what the witness said means a NoC flightpath whereas its self explanatrory when a witness says "it hit the Pentagon".

[jaydeehess]

Why oh why do you guys allow yourselves to get sucked into yet another idiotic flyover thread?

brutal honesty,,,,,, I can't say,,,,,,,,,,, no that could mean something else,,,,,,,, I just don't know.

[16.5]

Why oh why do you guys allow yourselves to get sucked into yet another idiotic flyover thread?

for the lulz!

I mean Old Roundhead came in here asking a question, and even though everyone knew that he really did not care about the answer a bunch of people answered.

And when we all answered he got all LULZZYY!!!1222222111

CIT pwns joo!

Fantastic!

[Mr.Herbert]

I typically get a huge laugh watching the idiots.... maybe it's because I had a liquid lunch with my boss... I have a hang over at 9pm... and I am forced to watch the elimination show on Idol with my wife.....

Carry on.

[bje]

But when the perpetrator of the crime holds the keys, its mighty tough to get completely to the bottom of everything.


That's a laugh! You poor kid, roundhead. It's been seven whole years and you haven't been able to make a case that the "government" is even a suspect.

:dl:

[jaydeehess]

... and I am forced to watch the elimination show on Idol with my wife.....

Carry on.

I am on the forum when the wife watches ER and CSI-Miami:D

[beachnut]

6. Those darn NOC witnesses who don’t place 77 where the Govt says it was. The dolts at CIT who have many different paths but can't figure out which on it is: the FDR was found in the Pentagon and as a military member on 911, you are calling my fellow soldiers liars, but you are the liar and delusion believer supporting terrorists by supporting liars and frauds. Good for you, a traitor to your country by calling me a liar with your failed lie. You are a terrorist apologist who has no evidence save the drug induced rant of CIT and Balsamo's quest for selling DVD for 16 bucks.

[R.Mackey]

I did not take any knife training but one of my first jobs involved using a boxcutter on a daily basis. I can attest to their sufficiency to inflict major physical damage especially to persons belted into a seat with no easy way to move or defend themselves.

It is a KNIFE, an extremly sharp knife. What it lacks in blade length it makes up for in sharpness.
The job I had was stocking grocery shelves ( and it was 35 years ago) and we used the knives to cut the tops off the boxes. On more than one occassion tin cans were punctured by a incorrectly placed boxcutter and a stocker in a hurray.

The knives described are not "box-cutters." They are "box-knives." Think something more like a straight razor.

Very unpleasant and certainly lethal. I wouldn't go up against one with less than a sidearm, unless I had absolutely no choice. This only makes Flight 93 the more remarkable.

[AJM8125]

Wasn't it also Cap'n Bob who said he would've taken the terrorist out too? Hmmm...

Anyway, I really hope Roundhead never has the occasion to be confronted by a highly motivated, knife weilding terrorist who probably has training in hand-to-hand combat.

That would be a shame.

[BCR]

The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.

Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.

Okay, I'll take this one Mr. Badass. For most of my law enforcement career I worked in rural communities, but in 1983 I decided to take a job in Memphis. My training SGT was a guy named Obie Thompson and was one of the toughest guys I have had occasion to meet. SGT Thompson had a purple heart from Vietnam, was an instructor at Kang Rhee's studio (the same one Elvis trained at) and a Marine Corp reservist. On top this; he was a well-built and fit guy.

I was back up home running with one of my old partners in Martin and mentioned to him that Memphis was one of the craziest places I had ever seen to do police work. Later that day, I learned that SGT Thompson had been killed. It seems he was alone responding to a complaint of a vagrant at the Crump Women's Hospital at around 2-3 in the morning. This was a "wave-down" call and he did not radio into dispatch that he was getting involved in something. Other officers responded when a call came in regarding a fight in the street (not knowing an officer was involved). When they arrived, the found SGT Thompson lying in the street bleeding. The Trama Center was only a few hundred feet from where he laid, but the bleeding was too severe to even get him there in time.

The best we could piece together from eyewitness statements was that SGT Thompson had escorted a very slim and dirty guy from the ER. Once outside, SGT Thompson had turned his back on the individual and began to walk back inside. As he did, the individual stabbed him in the back with what the Coroner determined to be a carpet knife. SGT Thompson turned to pursue the individual, but either due to blood loss (the first cut severed his Aorta) or slipping on the ice, he fell. The individual then turned and jumped on him, cutting out his eye and inflicting numerous other cuts.

His blood remained in the gutter ice for many days and every night I would stop and just stare at it. It served as a reminder that no matter how good, or how tough I might think I am, one junkie with a carpet knife could take the best of us out in a matter of seconds. By the way, we never determined who the individual was.

So bubba, you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Thompson, Obie Lee Sr (http://www.interment.net/data/us/tn/shelby/memnat/memphis_tcthom.htm), b. 11/28/1948, d. 01/20/1984, SSGT USMC, Plot: M 475, bur. 01/26/1984

[Bobert]

Thats a lie.

Everyone of them places the "plane" SOC, that simple fact making the OCT an out and out lie.

Among the many things i have noticed on this forum, is the outright fear you all have of CIT. Its extremely apparent.

The constant use of the "cult" phrase to try and discredit them makes me laugh.

They have flat owned you guys every time they have responded on this forum.

CIT owns this place
Oh ya thats it!
We are all afraid!
I guess you have now earned your....
http://www.need4sheed.com/images/bigwheel.jpg

For pwning us all!
Now run back to your CIT CULT masters for your warm oatmeal cookie and your sippie cup of milk.

[Arus808]

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=height+of+757

[X]

Wow. Plainly, Roundhead likes to talk tough but has no concept of the dirty brutal reality of fighting.

Knifes are dangerous. Period.

Even if they were "box-cutters" and not "box-knives", they are sharp. And while they break easily, that is only under a lateral force. Anything other than directly sideways, and you are pushing against the sharp edge. Even at an angle, it's going to cut you.
Likely badly.

Don't act all tough pretending that just because the knives were "box-cutters" they weren't dangerous. The blatant idiocy of such a notion is unfathomable.

If someone comes at you with a knife, you are in a world of trouble. No ifs. ands, or buts.

Perhaps you should read the views of a man who has been involved in many fights. Real fights. not controlled stuff like UFC.
NFSW, due to language (http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/knifefighting.html).

And wake up. Because you sound like an idiot child.


ETA: To keep on-topic:

The 757 plainly did not crash into the ground. Therefore it had to be high enough that the engines cleared the ground. Even if only barely. I trust you understand that there is a level of imprecision when determining the exact height the plane hit the building? Holes tend to crumble, deteriorate and expand. Which means the guesstimates could be off.

If your source said the engines would have been plowing into the ground, then your source's height estimate was slightly off.

If you really think that one questionable source, 13 cherry-picked witnesses, and vast amounts of incredulity and ignorance are enough to counter the data from radar, flight recorders, physics, other eyewitnesses, physical debris, and body parts left at the scene, then you are fantastically deluded.

[Redtail]

2. The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.
Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.




I'm 5'7" 160lbs and I would have little problem taking out a 220+ man, who was in shape, if he didn't know I was coming,* if I had an intact beer bottle much less a boxcutter.

*Key point there.

[Reheat]

2. The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.
Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them).I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.

If you had made no other stupid comment during your presence in this Forum, this comment alone would identify you as a complete and utter stupid deluded idiot.

Had the pilot been Chuck Norris or Claude Van Dam it would have made no difference. A man strapped into that confined space in a three-point harness would have been no match even for the smallest flight attendant with anything sharp and a determined attitude to kill him. This is even more true in that it was likely a surprise attack with virtually no time to act even if he otherwise could.

[njslim]

The knives, often called "boxcutters" by ignorant media types, should be called tactial
knives. Before 9/11 was legal to carry on knife with blade under 4". From flight 93
debris FBA recovered pieces of 14 different knives, while not all could be placed in
hands of hijackers, some undoubtly were used by them.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.npr.org/news/images/2006/apr/12/reuters/lanyard_240.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php%3FstoryId%3D5338980&usg=__n5MjnmJTos-eLG3jBPQ5GVBIXpA=&h=240&w=200&sz=29&hl=en&start=50&um=1&tbnid=MngmgqnI6AZUNM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=92&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dflight%2B93%2Bknives%2Bpicture%26ndsp %3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D40%26um%3D1%26i e%3DUTF-8

In case dont think small knife is dangerous - read this account of man jumped by 5
thugs armed with pistol and shotgun. Used small (3" blade from accounts I read"

Midtown Rambo; Victim Fight Backs, Kills Robber

WSBTV.com


ATLANTA -- Five robbers picked the wrong victim in Midtown Atlanta
last night and one of them paid with her life.

The victim, Thomas Autry, fought back; killing one robber and
wounding another. Three other suspects are in jail.

Autry was walking to his girlfriend's home after getting off work as
a waiter at Jocks and Jills.

The five suspects pulled up in a car and confronted the victim in the
500 block of Penn Street just before midnight.

Autry began running down the street yelling for help. Residents who
heard him called 911. While he was running, Autry pulled a pocket
knife from his backpack.

Two of the robbers jumped from the car. When one of the robbers
pointed a shotgun at him, the Autry kicked it out of his hands.

At that point two of the robbers jumped on the victim. During the
struggle he stabbed both of them. One, a teenaged female who has been
identified as Amy Martin, died of her wounds. Officials say Martin
was pregnant. A second is in critical condition.

Police arrived on the scene and with a description of the car; they
quickly arrested the three other suspects.

Other suspects arrested were identified as Christopher Daniel, 19, of
Atlanta; Kendall Barksdale, 18, of Atlanta; Christopher Hayes, 18, of
Douglasville and a 16-year-old male juvenile. They will all be
charged with aggravated assault and armed robbery.

Thomas Autry, who is a former U.S. Marine, will not be charged since
police say he was acting in self defense. Officials say Autry is
extremely remorseful.

[Wolrab]

If you duhbunkers would bother noticing, there are no stars in any of the Pentagon pictures!!!11! I can't wait to hear what you guys come up with to explain away that bit of damning evidence!
Plus, everyone with common sinse (don't bogart that joint, my friend) knows that any plane would have crashed if it hit light poles!
What about those 60,000 Jews that weren't at the Pentagon that day?
If you cut a donut on 5 sides, you get, wait for it, a PENTAGON shaped donut. I'd show a picture, but I had the munchies like real bad.

[twinstead]

You and your loser friends are afraid of the light of day. Turn off the Internet and POOF you and your loser friends are gone.

You truthers should think about this long and hard. If you indeed had the slam-dunk evidence that you think you had, this wouldn't be true after almost 8 years.

[kookbreaker]

So we have another internet ninja/tough guy who thinks small knives are harmless.

Disgusting.

[twinstead]

So we have another internet ninja/tough guy who thinks small knives are harmless.

Disgusting.

I wonder if there's a word in the English language that combines disgusting and idiotic...

[Wolrab]

I wonder if there's a word in the English language that combines disgusting and idiotic...
Can I nominate "truther"?

[twinstead]

Can I nominate "truther"?

;)

[JimBenArm]

[Sean Connery]Just like a truther to bring luggage to a knifefight...[/Sean Connery]

[Wolrab]

This thread seems to illustrate that there is nothing new under the sun. Someone will probably start a thread on "pull it" next.

[JimBenArm]

You want me to?

[RedIbis]

The knives, often called "boxcutters" by ignorant media types, should be called tactial
knives. Before 9/11 was legal to carry on knife with blade under 4". From flight 93
debris FBA recovered pieces of 14 different knives, while not all could be placed in
hands of hijackers, some undoubtly were used by them.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://media.npr.org/news/images/2006/apr/12/reuters/lanyard_240.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php%3FstoryId%3D5338980&usg=__n5MjnmJTos-eLG3jBPQ5GVBIXpA=&h=240&w=200&sz=29&hl=en&start=50&um=1&tbnid=MngmgqnI6AZUNM:&tbnh=110&tbnw=92&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dflight%2B93%2Bknives%2Bpicture%26ndsp %3D20%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26start%3D40%26um%3D1%26i e%3DUTF-8

In case dont think small knife is dangerous - read this account of man jumped by 5
thugs armed with pistol and shotgun. Used small (3" blade from accounts I read"

I haven't heard that pieces of 14 different knives were recovered from Flight 93. Your link doesn't discuss that. Can you please post the info backing up this claim. Thanks.

[Wolrab]

You want me to?
Might as well, it would make about as much sense as most of the crap posted lately.

[johnny karate]

I haven't heard that pieces of 14 different knives were recovered from Flight 93. Your link doesn't discuss that. Can you please post the info backing up this claim. Thanks.

Please do that as soon as possible, njslim. RedIbis is a stickler for accuracy.

Unless of course we're talking about one of his arguments, in which case he just makes things up.

[nicepants]

Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them,

Except that the policy prior to the 9/11 attacks was to cooperate with hijackers' demands.

You strike me as the type of monday-morning quarterback who scoffs at a bank teller who gives in to the demands of a bank robber instead of attempting to subdue them.

[njslim]

We all know of Red Ibis devotion to accuracy

In that vein post these links

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context.jsp?item=a021104shortknives

In addition Footnote 82 to 911 Commission report - sorry type is kinda small

http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-474.html

[BenBurch]

Unfortunately, there is no venue in which you could fight a willing truther who is armed only with a carry-on bag, while you wielded a locking pocket-knife, without assault charges being levied. Because I think that would stop their noise on this issue once and for all.

BTW, I used to carry my locking pocket knife on airliners ALL the time. I would take it from my pocket, and put it in the tray with my wallet, and only once did security ever object, and that person eventually let me through with it.

[jaydeehess]

The knives described are not "box-cutters." They are "box-knives." Think something more like a straight razor.

Very unpleasant and certainly lethal. I wouldn't go up against one with less than a sidearm, unless I had absolutely no choice. This only makes Flight 93 the more remarkable.

http://www.garymolitor.com/utilknife/what_is_a_box_knife.htm

fourth one from the top on the left side is very similar to what we were using in the 80's to cut the top off the cartons. Its blade, when new, is sharp enough to shave with as we all liked to show newbies as we shaved hair off our arms to demonstrate. The point would go through a fingernail almost like it was not there if you were not careful. I note that a variant of this is exactly what 911files describes as having killed the Memphis SGT., and this is the type that I was lead to believe that the hijackers carried.

The yellow one, third from the top on the right contains the snap off type blades. These are the sharpest but the blade is not as thick. Their utility comes by the ability to snap off a dull portion of the blade and advance the blade to get what is essentially a brand new sharp edge.

[jaydeehess]

Unfortunately, there is no venue in which you could fight a willing truther who is armed only with a carry-on bag, while you wielded a locking pocket-knife, without assault charges being levied. Because I think that would stop their noise on this issue once and for all.

If its the flight deck crew we are speaking about here, and RH did mention Burlingame, then the truther you wish to demonstrate on would not have a carry on. He would be strapped into a seat with a desk beside him making it difficult to get out of the seat

BTW, I used to carry my locking pocket knife on airliners ALL the time. I would take it from my pocket, and put it in the tray with my wallet, and only once did security ever object, and that person eventually let me through with it.

As did I. I almost lost my knife last year. It was in my pocket as we ate lunch before going through security. I then noticed it when I went to pay for lunch. I headed back to the check-in counter and put the knife in my carry-on and checked it into baggage. Otherwise some security guy would have gotten a nice Swiss Army knife for a gift that day.:(

[jaydeehess]

To the OP, how far off the ground? I recall seeing a picture that suggests that the bottom of the port engine punched the curb just in front of the Pentagon.

that's low!

[HeyLeroy]

Okay, I'll take this one Mr. Badass. For most of my law enforcement career I worked in rural communities, but in 1983 I decided to take a job in Memphis. My training SGT was a guy named Obie Thompson and was one of the toughest guys I have had occasion to meet. SGT Thompson had a purple heart from Vietnam, was an instructor at Kang Rhee's studio (the same one Elvis trained at) and a Marine Corp reservist. On top this; he was a well-built and fit guy.

I was back up home running with one of my old partners in Martin and mentioned to him that Memphis was one of the craziest places I had ever seen to do police work. Later that day, I learned that SGT Thompson had been killed. It seems he was alone responding to a complaint of a vagrant at the Crump Women's Hospital at around 2-3 in the morning. This was a "wave-down" call and he did not radio into dispatch that he was getting involved in something. Other officers responded when a call came in regarding a fight in the street (not knowing an officer was involved). When they arrived, the found SGT Thompson lying in the street bleeding. The Trama Center was only a few hundred feet from where he laid, but the bleeding was too severe to even get him there in time.

The best we could piece together from eyewitness statements was that SGT Thompson had escorted a very slim and dirty guy from the ER. Once outside, SGT Thompson had turned his back on the individual and began to walk back inside. As he did, the individual stabbed him in the back with what the Coroner determined to be a carpet knife. SGT Thompson turned to pursue the individual, but either due to blood loss (the first cut severed his Aorta) or slipping on the ice, he fell. The individual then turned and jumped on him, cutting out his eye and inflicting numerous other cuts.

His blood remained in the gutter ice for many days and every night I would stop and just stare at it. It served as a reminder that no matter how good, or how tough I might think I am, one junkie with a carpet knife could take the best of us out in a matter of seconds. By the way, we never determined who the individual was.

So bubba, you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Thompson, Obie Lee Sr (http://www.interment.net/data/us/tn/shelby/memnat/memphis_tcthom.htm), b. 11/28/1948, d. 01/20/1984, SSGT USMC, Plot: M 475, bur. 01/26/1984

A friend of mine was once the third-ranked heavyweight boxer in Ontario. He was a third-degree blackbelt in Isshinryu.

Robbie Robinson was a multi-talented, intelligent fighter from Windsor who sparred with some of the top-ten professional heavy-weights in the world. Not only did his size and discipline lead him to the sport of boxing, but Robinson also earned a black belt and competed in several tough-man contests. Robbie's keen intellect also led him to a degree in criminology; however, Robbie never reached his full potential. In 1990 Robbie Robinson was tragically murdered leaving behind a wife, a young son, and countless loved ones in the sport of boxing and beyond.
http://www.bordercityboxing.com/pr.htm

One night after his wife picked him up from his doorman job (his day job was as a counsellor at a youth home for at-risk girls) he had her stop their car when he saw a group of six men harassing a mixed-race couple. He told his wife to circle the block. She did, but couldn't find Robbie. She eventually did, on the next block over.

In time to be with him as he drew his last breath, with a short kitchen knife protruding from his chest.

ETA: Your vile characterization of the lack of bravery on the part of several terrorist victims' actions is reprehensible.

[roundhead]

What are you talking about? Officer Richard Cox from the Columbia Pike, Officer William Lagasse from the CITGO station, and Alan Wallace from the Pentagon grounds all radioed immediately after the crash to report the 757 headed to the Pentagon and/or crashing into it. David Winslow from Pentagon City called the AP within minutes to tell them that he witnessed the tail of a jumbo jet plough into the Pentagon. Those were the first reports of those at the scene.


Hey Mangoose....You gotta do better than that deceit filled post you made.

Winslow actually said exactly this:

David Winslow, a reporter with AP's Broadcast News Center in Washington, was sitting in his tenth-floor apartment, looking out at the capital, when he saw a jumbo tail go by him. "I heard this enormous sound of turbulence. . .As I turned to my right, I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me. In a split second, you heard this boom. A combination of a crack and a thud. It rattled my windows. I thought they were going to blow out. Then came an enormous fireball."

http://www.ap.org/BreakingNews/quote.html
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~julianr/lexisnexis/winslow1.txt
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0082_b_Th...%20aircraft.htm



Which you and other OCT slurpers somehow turn into this:


AP reporter Dave Winslow says he saw the tail of a large airliner plow right into the Pentagon.



Your interpretation of what the guy(Winslow)said bears zero relationship to reality.

Stick with the truth.....................


If people actually saw an impact(which they didnt)guys like you and others of your ilk wouldnt have to drag up absurd lies and post them to defend the wretched OCT.

[beachnut]

5.The fact the damage to the building doesnt fit with an airliner crash Another lie from you, the damage is exactly that of an airliner, your delusion is junk. Read this report, the damage is exactly that of a 757 at more that 535 mph. In seven years you could have had an engineering degree, but you picked ignorance and lies. http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf (http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf)

I suspect your fellow liars in CIT and p4t have not read this report due to the fact they are selling lies and the real evidence, or knowledge of real evidence makes them even bigger liars. You insult everyone in the military as you spew this nonsense derived from hearsay lies and fantasies from you and 911Truth. It is hard to post dumber statements but you are doing it.

[Bobert]

If you had made no other stupid comment during your presence in this Forum, this comment alone would identify you as a complete and utter stupid deluded idiot.

Had the pilot been Chuck Norris or Claude Van Dam it would have made no difference. A man strapped into that confined space in a three-point harness would have been no match even for the smallest flight attendant with anything sharp and a determined attitude to kill him. This is even more true in that it was likely a surprise attack with virtually no time to act even if he otherwise could.
WOW Roundhead will do anything in support of his beloved terrorists.
Those comments are worthy of adding this troll to ignore.

[roundhead]

Another lie from you, the damage is exactly that of an airliner, your delusion is junk. Read this report, the damage is exactly that of a 757 at more that 535 mph. In seven years you could have had an engineering degree, but you picked ignorance and lies. http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf (http://www.fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf)

I suspect your fellow liars in CIT and p4t have not read this report due to the fact they are selling lies and evidence, or knowledge of real evidence makes them even bigger liars. You insult everyone in the military as you spew this nonsense derived from hearsay lies and fantasies from you and 911Truth. It is hard to post dumber statements but you are doing it.




If you are so keen to knowing the truth(i assume as a good American you are)

Tell your buddies like Mangoose to not vomit out lies(the likes of which i pointed out in the post previous to yours.
Dont worry, i dont expect you to comment on such absurd lies, as i know you are busy defending others like them.

[beachnut]

... If people actually saw an impact(which they didnt)guys like you and others of your ilk wouldnt have to drag up absurd lies and post them to defend the wretched OCT.
Your lie of 77 not hitting the Pentagon proves your ignorance on 911.

How do you account for the fact that CIT accurately presented Boger to the world and Sean says he watched Flight 77 HIT the Pentagon.



Feet from where 77 impacted the Pentagon.
Boger, “I just watched it hit the building."
A CIT witness!


Many people saw Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. You have to make up testimony to make your delusion work. BOGER A CIT WITNESS SAYS FLIGHT 77 IMPACTED THE PENTAGON; CIT - WRONG OVER 7 YEARS.

This makes you a liar on this topic. Good work you can't get one thing right about 911. And this is your A game.

Good Americans do not blame others with hearsay lies and fantasy to protect the terrorists who did the murders and whose DNA was found in the Pentagon with all souls on board Flight 77 which your insane idea says did not happen. I know the military did not cover up 911 and I know you are telling lies and the evidence, tons of it backs me up as you can’t grasp any of the evidence due to your complete lack of knowledge on 911.

You are not acting like a good American slinging lies about; you are a terrorist apologist doing a poor job at it.

[A W Smith]

Roundhead. You wouldn't be sharing your account now would you?

Top of the fuselage to bottom of engines. (landing gear was up)* 5.4m 17ft 8in

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2814163&postcount=348

Eyewitness accounts contradicting "The PentaCon"
Source for all quotes is 911research.wtc7.net

NAME: Steve Anderson

QUOTE: "I witnessed the jet hit the Pentagon on September 11. From my office on the 19th floor of the USA TODAY building in Arlington, Va., I have a view of Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, the Pentagon, National Airport and the Potomac River. ... Shortly after watching the second tragedy, I heard jet engines pass our building, which, being so close to the airport is very common. But I thought the airport was closed. I figured it was a plane coming in for landing. A few moments later, as I was looking down at my desk, the plane caught my eye. It didn't register at first. I thought to myself that I couldn't believe the pilot was flying so low. Then it dawned on me what was about to happen. I watched in horror as the plane flew at treetop level, banked slightly to the left, drug it's wing along the ground and slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon exploding into a giant orange fireball. Then black smoke. Then white smoke."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: The premise of The Pentacon is contingent upon the plane flying over the building. If the plane's wing was dragging along the ground AS IT ALLEGEDLY HIT, there is no possible way it could have pulled up to perform the flyover without AT LEAST losing its wing (if not crashing completely), thus making it unable to fly.




NAME: Gary Bauer

QUOTE: "I was in a massive traffic jam, hadn't moved more than a hundred yards in twenty minutes. ... I had just passed the closest place the Pentagon is to the exit on 395 . . . when all of a sudden I heard the roar of a jet engine. I looked at the woman sitting in the car next to me. She had this startled look on her face. We were all thinking the same thing. We looked out the front of our windows to try to see the plane, and it wasn't until a few seconds later that we realized the jet was coming up behind us on that major highway. And it veered to the right into the Pentagon. The blast literally rocked all of our cars. It was an incredible moment."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Two reasons. First, it directly contradicts the North side flight path: if the plane was "coming up behind" them on 395 as they were traveling towards the Pentagon, it couldn't have been on the Citgo's north side. Secondly, at the angle the onlookers would have seen the plane crash into the Pentagon, they would have EASILY seen it if it had somehow flown over.

Gary Bauer did not report seeing the plane fly over the Pentagon.




NAME: Mickey Bell

QUOTE: The jet came in from the south and banked left as it entered the building, narrowly missing the Singleton Electric trailer and the on-site foreman, Mickey Bell. Bell had just left the trailer when he heard a loud noise. The next thing he recalled was picking himself off the floor, where he had been thrown by the blast. Bell, who had been less than 100 feet from the initial impact of the plane, was nearly struck by one of the plane's wings as it sped by him. In shock, he got into his truck, which had been parked in the trailer compound, and sped away. He wandered around Arlington in his truck and tried to make wireless phone calls. He ended up back at Singleton's headquarters in Gaithersburg two hours later, according to President Singleton, not remembering much. The full impact of the closeness of the crash wasn't realized until coworkers noticed damage to Bell's work vehicle. He had plastic and rivets from an airplane imbedded in its sheet metal, but Bell had no idea what had happened. During Bell's close call, other Singleton workers, including sub-foreman Greg Cobaugh, were doing other work on the first and third floors. The blast wasn't very loud to them. They were talking about reports that two planes crashed into the World Trade Center in Manhattan, New York - not considering the noise they heard could be a similar attack.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Unless Lyte's going to suggest that the rivets embedded in his truck were "planted beforehand", I don't see why not. Although I don't think I'd put that past him.




NAME: Richard Benedetto

QUOTE: "It was an American Airlines airplane, I could see it very clearly.(...) I didn't see the impact. (...) The sound itself sounded more like a thud rather than a bomb (...) rather than a loud bomb explosion it sounded muffled, heavy, very deep. I didn't see any flaps, it looked like the plane was just in normal flying mode but heading straight down. It was straight. The only thing we saw on the ground outside there was a piece of a ... the tail of a lamp post."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Hey, if the conspiracy theorists can claim that eyewitnesses saying that they heard things that sounded like bombs proves that bombs were used in the WTC, why can't I claim that eyewitnesses saying they heard things that DIDN'T sound like bombs prove that there WASN'T a bomb?




NAME: Brian Birdwell

QUOTE: LTC Brian Birdwell. He was just heading back down the hall to his office when the building exploded in front of him. The flash fire was immediate and the smoke was thick. The blast had thrown him down, giving him a concussion. He wanted to head down the hall toward the A ring...but because he couldn't see anything he had no idea which way to go and he didn't want to head in the wrong direction. (...) Once they stabilized Brian, they transferred him to George Washington Hospital where...the best, cutting edge burn doctor in the U.S. The doctor told him that had he not gone to Georgetown first, he probably would not have survived because of the jet fuel in his lungs.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: How did he get "jet fuel in his lungs" if there was no jet, hmmm?

Watch, now Lyte's going to claim that the jet fuel in his lungs was "planted beforehand".




NAME: Donald R. Bouchoux

QUOTE: Donald R. Bouchoux, 53, a retired Naval officer, a Great Falls resident, a Vietnam veteran and former commanding officer of a Navy fighter squadron, was driving west from Tysons Corner to the Pentagon for a 10am meeting. He wrote: "At 9:40 a.m. I was driving down Washington Boulevard (Route 27) along the side of the Pentagon when the aircraft crossed about 200 yards [should be more than 150 yards from the impact] in front of me and impacted the side of the building. There was an enormous fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down. The car moved about a foot to the right when the shock wave hit. I had what must have been an emergency oxygen bottle from the airplane go flying down across the front of my Explorer and then a second piece of jagged metal come down on the right side of the car."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: He was in the PERFECT position to see if the plane had performed Lyte's flyover maneuver. He did not report seeing a flyover.




NAME: Mark Bright

QUOTE: Defense Protective Service officers were the first on the scene of the terrorist attack. One, Mark Bright, actually saw the plane hit the building. He had been manning the guard booth at the Mall Entrance to the building. "I saw the plane at the Navy Annex area," he said. "I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low -- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down." The plane would have been seconds from impact -- the annex is only a few hundred yards from the Pentagon. He said he heard the plane "power-up" just before it struck the Pentagon. "As soon as it struck the building I just called in an attack, because I knew it couldn't be accidental," Bright said. He jumped into his police cruiser and headed to the area.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Two reasons: first, he confirms that the plane knocked down street lights--the same street lights Lyte claims were planted the night before, and which were ON THE SOUTH SIDE FLIGHT PATH. Secondly, the fact that the plane "powered up" indicates an increase in speed, which would have been incompatible with an attempt to change elevation in time to perform a flyover. It's a simple fact: the faster you're going, the more distance it's going to take to gain altitude.




NAME: Lisa Burgess

QUOTE: Stars and Stripes reporter Lisa Burgess was walking on the Pentagon's innermost corridor, across the courtyard, when the incident happened. "I heard two loud booms - one large, one smaller, and the shock wave threw me against the wall," she said.Burgess, reporting by telephone from the scene at about 4 p.m., said that five hours after the blast, still no one was able to get into the building. After the first casualties were removed, no one was brought out of the building, either dead or alive.

WHY SHE PWNS THE PENTACON: She was IN THE BLOODY COURTYARD--don't you think she'd have noticed if the plane had flown over as Lyte claims?




NAME: Wayne T. Day

QUOTE: For one employee with Wedge One's mechanical subcontractor John J. Kirlin Inc., Rockville MD, "lucky" is an understatement. "We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in. He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows," says Kirlin President Wayne T. Day, who believes the window structure saved the man's life. According to Matt Hahr, Kirlin's senior project manager at the Pentagon, the employee "was thrown about 80 ft down the hall through the air. As he was traveling through the air, he says the ceiling was coming down from the concussion. He got thrown into a closet, the door slammed shut and the fireball went past him," recounts Hahr. "Jet fuel was on him and it irritated his eyes, but he didn't get burned. Then the fireball blew over and the sprinklers came on, and he was able to crawl out of the closet and get out of the building through the courtyard."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: There's that jet fuel again. I'd like to see Merc and Lyte explain how all this jet fuel could be "planted".




NAME: Defina

QUOTE: "The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear. The devastation was horrific. It was obvious that some of the victims we found had no time to react. The distance the firefighters had to travel down corridors to reach the fires was a problem. With only a good 25 minutes of air in their SCBA bottles, to save air they left off their face pieces as they walked and took in a lot of smoke," Captain Defina said. Captain Defina was the shift commander [of an aircraft rescue firefighters crew.]

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Pieces of the nose gear. Inside the Pentagon.

"Plant" THAT, Lyte.




NAME: Michael DiPaula

QUOTE: Michael DiPaula 41, project coordinator Pentagon Renovation Team - He left a meeting in the Pentagon just minutes before the crash, looking for an electrician who didn't show, in a construction trailer less than 75 feet away. "Suddenly, an airplane roared into view, nearly shearing the roof off the trailer before slamming into the E ring. 'It sounded like a missile,' DiPaula recalls . . . Buried in debris and covered with airplane fuel, he was briefly listed by authorities as missing, but eventually crawled from the flaming debris and the shroud of black smoke unscathed.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Oops! There's that airplane fuel again! Must've been "planted beforehand", eh, Lyte?




NAME: Penny Elgas

QUOTE: "Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there. My first thought was "Oh My God, this must be World War III!" In that split second, my brain flooded with adrenaline and I watched everything play out in ultra slow motion, I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times but at that point it never occurred to me that this might be a plane with passengers. In my adrenaline-filled state of mind, I was overcome by my visual senses. The day had started out beautiful and sunny and I had driven to work with my car's sunroof open. I believe that I may have also had one or more car windows open because the traffic wasn't moving anyway. At the second that I saw the plane, my visual senses took over completely and I did not hear or feel anything -- not the roar of the plane, or wind force, or impact sounds. The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building. It was here that I closed my eyes for a moment and when I looked back, the entire area was awash in thick black smoke."

WHY SHE PWNS THE PENTACON: Unfortunately, she does not specify WHICH side of the Citgo she saw the plane fly on. Would've been helpful. However, from this account, we can tell that she had a clear view of the plane hitting the Pentagon. What's more, she says she saw "the fuselage hit the wall" and "the wings dissapear[ed] into the Pentagon".

It is a physical impossibility for the fuselage to hit the wall and the wings to disappear into the wall AND for the plane to fly over at the same time.




NAME: Walker Lee Evey

QUOTE: The plane approached the Pentagon about six feet off the ground, clipping a light pole, a car antenna, a construction trailer and an emergency generator before slicing into the building, said Lee Evey, the manager of the Pentagon's ongoing billion-dollar renovation. The plane penetrated three of the Pentagon's five rings, but was probably stopped from going farther by hundreds of concrete columns. The plane peeled back as it entered, leaving pieces of the front of the plane near the outside of the building and pieces from the rear of the aircraft farther inside, Evey said. The floors just above the impact remained intact for about 35 minutes after the crash, allowing many people in those offices to escape, Evey said.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Light pole. Car antenna. Contstruction trailer. Emergency generator. And, once again, plane parts INSIDE the Pentagon.




NAME: Ken Ford

QUOTE: Ken Ford : One eyewitness, State Department employee Ken Ford, said he watched from the 15th floor of the State Department Annex, just across the PotomacRiver from the Pentagon. We were watching the airport through binoculars, Ford said, referring to Reagan National Airport, a short distance away. The plane was a two-engine turbo prop that flew up the river from National. Then it turned back toward the Pentagon. We thought it had been waved off and then it hit the building.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: He was viewing the OTHER side of the Pentagon from the alleged plane crash. If there was a flyover, he'd have seen it.




NAME: Kat Gaines

QUOTE: Kat Gaines, heading south on Route 110, approached the parking lots, saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles.

WHY SHE PWNS THE PENTACON: Another eyewitness saying she saw the plane hit the poles that Lyte claims were planted. Poles which, by the way, were on the South side flight path.




NAME: Afework Hagos

QUOTE: Afework Hagos, a computer programmer, was on his way to work but stuck in a traffic jam near the Pentagon when the plane flew over. "There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. Everybody was running away in different directions. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lampposts on the way in."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Lampposts. The ones that were on the SOUTH SIDE FLIGHT PATH. Clipped. He saw it.




NAME: Joe Harrington

QUOTE: Harrington was working on the installation of new furniture in Wedge One, when he was called out to the parking lot to talk about security with his customer moments before the crash. "About two minutes later one of my guys pointed to an American Airlines airplane 20 feet high over Washington Blvd.," Harrington said. "It seemed like it made impact just before the wedge. It was like a Hollywood movie or something."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Directly contradicts the North side flight path. There is NO WAY for it to have been flying over Washington Blvd--for long enough for somebody to point it out--have flown on the North side of the Citgo, and then hit the Pentagon. That just doesn't happen. Washington Blvd is on the SOUTH side flight path.





NAME: Albert Hemphill

QUOTE: From the view of the Navy Annex : "After a few moments, Lt Gen Ron Kadish, Director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization entered the Secure Conference Room to pursue the day's activities and do real work. This office, with two nice windows and a great view of the monuments, the Capitol and the Pentagon was "good digs" by any Pentagon standard. I walked in the office and stood peering out of the window looking at the Pentagon. As I stood there, I instinctively ducked at the extremely loud roar and whine of a jet engine spooling up. Immediately, the large silver cylinder of an aircraft appeared in my window, coming over my right shoulder as I faced the Westside of the Pentagon directly towards the heliport. The aircraft, looking to be either a 757 or Airbus, seemed to come directly over the annex, as if it had been following Columbia Pike - an Arlington road leading to Pentagon. The aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between 250 to 300 knots. All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my field of view for approximately 3 seconds. The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings, making a slight right wing slow adjustment as he impacted low on the Westside of the building to the right of the helo, tower and fire vehicle around corridor 5. What instantly followed was a large yellow fireball accompanied by an extremely bass sounding, deep thunderous boom. The yellow fireball rose quickly as black smoke engulfed the entire Westside of the Pentagon, obscuring the whole of the heliport. I could feel the concussion and felt the shockwave of the blast impact the window of the Annex, knocking me against the desk.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Three for the price of one! First, he says the plane came over his "right shoulder. If he's viewing from the Navy Annex, this would put the plane more to the SOUTH of the Navy Annex than to the North. It would have been extremely difficult if not impossible for the plane to manuever around the OPPOSITE side of the Citgo AND THEN fly towards the Pentagon. Secondly, he mentions that the plane "level[ed] its wings" before impact, thus, it was NOT pulling up, thus COULD NOT have flown over. Thirdly, he clearly states that he saw the plane impact BEFORE he saw the fireball. Thus, Lyte CANNOT make the argument that the fireball somehow obscured his vision.




NAME: Jerry Henson

QUOTE: Inside the hell that was once his office, Jerry Henson freed his hands enough to move rubble off of his shoulders. He dislodged his head. But he couldn't move the heavy desktop from his lap. It had been 15, maybe 20 minutes since everything turned dark and painful. Still no answer from Capt. Punches. Now fires were burning closer as deposits of jet fuel ignited. "You could hear them lighting off," Henson said. "They would go 'poof,' kind of like when you light a furnace. You could hear these getting closer." The two other men in the office couldn't get to Henson, but they found a hole in the wall to crawl through. And they found help. Minutes passed slowly as Henson remained trapped in the dark and more conscious of every breath. He heard rubble crumbling and splashes like footsteps in puddles. Then he saw a slice of light. "I'm a doctor, I'm here to help you," said a voice. Navy Lt. Cmdr. David Tarantino, the doctor, and Capt. David M. Thomas Jr. had dodged slithering electrical wires and dripping solder to reach Henson. Tarantino, realizing Henson was pinned, got on his back and lifted the table top with his feet enough for Henson to slide out. Thomas and Tarantino pulled him back out through the maze. With a blur of light and a rush of fresh air, Henson knew he was safe. Jerry Henson, now 65, spent four days at nearby Arlington Hospital Center. Doctors sewed up the gash in the back of his head and on his chin. His neck was sprained, his back was sore, and he still needed treatment for smoke inhalation. "I was eager to get out," he said. "I thought the sooner I was able to get walking and breathing, the better I'd avoid pneumonia and things like that."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Why, look...that pesky JET FUEL is back again!





NAME: Will Jarvis

QUOTE: From time spent on military aircraft as part of his job at the Pentagon, Will Jarvis (who graduated with a bachelor of applied science in 1987 while attending New College) knows what aviation fuel smells like. That smell was his only clue that a plane had crashed into the Pentagon, where he works as an operations research analyst for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Jarvis, who was around the corner from the disaster, tried but failed to see the plane when he left the building. "There was just nothing left. It was incinerated. We couldn't see a tail or a wing or anything," he says. "Just a big black hole in the building with smoke pouring out of it." For someone sitting only 300 metres away from the carnage of American Airlines Flight 77, Jarvis and his officemates were surprisingly well insulated from it. "We thought the plane was a dump truck backing into the building, because there was a lot of construction going on," he says. The group noticed that the sky was darker than normal, but still didn't think much of it. "Then I saw little bits of silver falling from the sky," says Jarvis.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Another two for one. Jet fuel AND bits of silver falling from the sky.

I guess the "bits of silver" were "planted beforehand" too, eh, Lyte?





NAME: Terrance Kean

QUOTE: Terrance Kean, 35, who lives in a 14-story building nearby, heard the loud jet engines and glanced out his window. "I saw this very, very large passenger jet," said the architect, who had been packing for a move. "It just plowed right into the side of the Pentagon. The nose penetrated into the portico. And then it sort of disappeared, and there was fire and smoke everywhere. . . . It was very sort of surreal."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Specifically SAW the nose penetrate the wall. Can't really fly over after that, now can it?





NAME: Mark Steven Kirk

QUOTE: Rep. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.), a Naval Reserve intelligence officer. ''Apparently, the fire killed everybody in there,'' said Kirk, shortly after he learned that two friends perished in the center. Kirk also went to the site. ''The first thing you smell is the burning. And then you can smell the aviation fuel. And then you can smell this sickly, rotten-meat smell,'' he said.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Yup, jet fuel.




NAME: Lincoln Liebner

QUOTE: After the second plane hit the World Trade Center, Major Lincoln Leibner jumped in his pickup truck and raced to the Pentagon. As he ran to an entrance, he heard jet engines and turned in time to see the American Airlines plane diving toward the building. "I was close enough that I could see through the windows of the airplane, and watch as it as it hit," he said. "There was no doubt in my mind what I was watching. Not for a second. It was accelerating," he said. "It was wheels up, flaps up, engines full throttle. "

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Close enough to SEE IT HIT, and again, he mentions that it was ACCELERATING. The faster you're going, the more distance it takes to pull up.




NAME: David Marra

QUOTE: David Marra, 23, an information-technology specialist, had turned his BMW off an I-395 exit to the highway just west of the Pentagon when he saw an American Airlines jet swooping in, its wings wobbly, looking like it was going to slam right into the Pentagon: "It was 50 ft. off the deck when he came in. It sounded like the pilot had the throttle completely floored. The plane rolled left and then rolled right. Then he caught an edge of his wing on the ground." There is a helicopter pad right in front of the side of the Pentagon. The wing touched there, then the plane cartwheeled into the building.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Another eyewitness saying the wing was dragging along the ground as it hit the Pentagon. That wing would have been lost if a flyover was attempted.




NAME: Stephen McGraw

QUOTE: Father Stephen McGraw was driving to a graveside service at Arlington National Cemetery the morning of Sept. 11, when he mistakenly took the Pentagon exit onto Washington Boulevard, putting him in a position to witness American Airlines Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon. "The traffic was very slow moving, and at one point just about at a standstill," said McGraw, a Catholic priest at St. Anthony Parish in Falls Church. "I was in the left hand lane with my windows closed. I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars." McGraw estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon. "The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car. "I saw it crash into the building," he said. "My only memories really were that it looked like a plane coming in for a landing. I mean in the sense that it was controlled and sort of straight. That was my impression," he said. "There was an explosion and a loud noise and I felt the impact. I remember seeing a fireball come out of two windows (of the Pentagon). I saw an explosion of fire billowing through those two windows. "He literally had the stole in one hand and a prayer book in the other and in one fluid motion crossed the guardrail," said Mark Faram, a reporter from the Navy Times who witnessed McGraw in the first moments after the crash.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Oh, where to begin? First of all, he's in a GREAT position to witness any potential flyover. Secondly, his account easily confirms that the plane flew ALONG WASHINGTON BLVD, which would directly contradict the North side flight path. Finally, he saw the plane not only clip the light pole which was on the SOUTH side flight path, but also strike the taxi whose driver Lyte claims is lying!




NAME: Kirk Milburn

QUOTE: I was right underneath the plane, said Kirk Milburn, a construction supervisor for Atlantis Co., who was on the Arlington National Cemetery exit of Interstate 395 when he said he saw the plane heading for the Pentagon. "I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles," said Milburn. "It was like a WHOOOSH whoosh, then there was fire and smoke, then I heard a second explosion."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Yes, the "second explosion" comment might be suspicious to tinfoil hatters, but that's for another discussion. The purpose of THIS article is to discuss Lyte's flyover claim. Anyway, this guy claims he was "right underneath the plane"...on INTERSTATE 395! This DIRECTLY contradicts the Citgo North side flight path.




NAME: Vin Narayanan

QUOTE: "The plane exploded after it hit, the tail came off and it began burning immediately. Within five minutes, police and emergency vehicles began arriving," said Vin Narayanan, a reporter at USA TODAY.com, who was driving near the Pentagon when the plane hit.

"At 9:35 a.m., I pulled alongside the Pentagon. With traffic at a standstill, my eyes wandered around the road, looking for the cause of the traffic jam. Then I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet. The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me as it headed straight at the Pentagon. The windows were dark on American Airlines Flight 77 as it streaked toward its target, only 50 yards away. The hijacked jet slammed into the Pentagon at a ferocious speed. But the Pentagon's wall held up like a champ. It barely budged as the nose of the plane curled upwards and crumpled before exploding into a massive fireball. The people who built that wall should be proud. Its ability to withstand the initial impact of the jet probably saved thousands of lives. I hopped out of my car after the jet exploded, nearly oblivious to a second jet hovering in the skies. Hands shaking, I borrowed a cell phone to call my mom and tell her I was safe. Then I called into work, to let them know what happened. But not once was I able to take my eyes off the inferno in front of me. I think I saw the bodies of passengers burning. But I'm not sure. It could have been Pentagon workers. It could have been my mind playing tricks on me. I hope it was my mind playing tricks on me. The highway was filled with shocked commuters, walking around in a daze."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Saw the tail come off. I don't see how this could've been "planted beforehand" in any way. He also saw the plain clip the exit sign, indicating that it flew on the official flight path. Finally, he describes the impact in detail, making it nigh impossible that he could've been mistaken as to whether the plane hit.





NAME: Mary Ann Owens

QUOTE: Mary Ann Owens, a journalist with Gannett News Service - was driving along by the side of the Pentagon. Here, she recalls the events of that horrific day and her feelings about the tragedy 12 months on. "The sound of sudden and certain death roared in my ears as I sat lodged in gridlock on Washington Boulevard, next to the Pentagon on September 11. Up to that moment I had only experienced shock by the news coming from New York City and frustration with the worse-than-normal traffic snarl ... but it wasn't until I heard the demon screaming of that engine that I expected to die. Between the Pentagon's helicopter pad, which sits next to the road, and Reagan Washington National Airport a couple of miles south, aviation noise is common along my commute to the silver office towers in Rosslyn where Gannett Co Inc. were housed last autumn. But this engine noise was different. It was too sudden, too loud, too encompassing. Looking up didn't tell me what type of plane it was because it was so close I could only see the bottom. Realising the Pentagon was its target, I didn't think the careering, full-throttled craft would get that far. Its downward angle was too sharp, its elevation of maybe 50 feet, too low. Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass. Gripping the steering wheel of my vibrating car, I involuntarily ducked as the wobbling plane thundered over my head. Once it passed, I raised slightly and grimaced as the left wing dipped and scraped the helicopter area just before the nose crashed into the southwest wall of the Pentagon. Still gripping the wheel, I could feel both the car and my heart jolt at the moment of impact. An instant inferno blazed about 125 yards from me. The plane, the wall and the victims disappeared under coal-black smoke, three-storey tall flames and intense heat. As the thudding stopped, screams of horror and hysteria rose from the line of cars (...) The full impact of actually being alive overwhelmed me. A mere 125 yards had made me a witness instead of a casualty. Survival wasn't a miracle, it was luck ... pure luck."

WHY SHE PWNS THE PENTACON: TOO MUCH. The "downward angle" that was "too sharp"--making it nigh impossible for the plane to pull up to perform Lyte's flyover. The street lights on the official flight path falling over. The plane "barely clearing the interstate 395 overpass". Wing dragging along the ground. That's FOUR IN *********** ONE.




NAME: Steve Patterson

QUOTE: Steve Patterson, who lives in Pentagon City, said it appeared to him that a commuter jet swooped over Arlington National Cemetery and headed for the Pentagon "at a frightening rate ... just slicing into that building." Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said. He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetary so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side. The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said. "At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon ... I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?" He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building. "It looked like a normal landing, as if someone knew exactly what they were doing," said Patterson, a graphics artist who works at home. "This looked intentional.".

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: I-395. Directly contradicts the...*sigh*...this is getting old...and redundant.





NAME: Daniel C. Pfeilstucker Jr.

QUOTE: Daniel C. Pfeilstucker Jr., caught in the flying debris, didn't know if he was going to make it out alive. The Pentagon was on fire. "It was horrifying," Mr. Pfeilstucker says (...) Danny Pfeilstucker is a commissioning agent for John J. Kirlin Inc., a Maryland-based mechanical contracting company that worked on the Pentagon renovation project that was nearing completion September 11. (...) Kirlin Inc., among many companies involved in renovating the Pentagon since the early 1990s, was in charge of updating plumbing and heating units. Around 9:30 a.m., Mr. Pfeilstucker and a co-worker got orders to check a hot-water leak in a third-floor office on the western side. After doing so, he stepped off an elevator on the second floor in Corridor 4, ladder in hand. Suddenly the walls and the ceiling began to collapse around him. The lights went out. "It went from light to dark to orange to complete black," Mr. Pfeilstucker says. "It was so dark I couldn't even see my hand in front of my face."Within seconds, his left leg buckled. Unable to grab on to anything, he was thrust 70 feet down the corridor and into a tiny telephone closet halfway down the hallway connecting E Ring and A Ring. All I know is that the blast must have pushed open the steel door to the closet," says Mr. Pfeilstucker, who had been 40 feet away from the plane's point of impact.He remembers shutting the door and trying to stand up, not understanding what had just happened. "I thought it was some sort of a construction blast," Mr. Pfeilstucker says. "Or maybe there was a helicopter accident." His hard hat and work goggles were blown away. His ladder also had disappeared. (...) The fire sprinklers came on as the temperature shot up.Then he smelled jet fuel and smoke. The putrid odor was seeping into the closet."It was this odor that I can't describe, but one that I'll never forget, that's for sure," Mr. Pfeilstucker says. "It was so hard to breathe. I didn't think I was going to make it out."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Jet fuel. Again. Sigh.




NAME: Frank Probst

QUOTE: Frank Probst : a Pentagon renovation worker and retired Army officer, he was inspecting newly installed telecommunications wiring inside the five-story, 6.5-million-square-foot building. The tall, soft-spoken Probst had a 10 a.m. meeting. About 9:25 a.m., he stopped by the renovation workers' trailer just south of the Pentagon heliport. Someone had a television turned on in the trailer's break room that showed smoke pouring out of the twin towers in New York. "The Pentagon would make a pretty good target," someone in the break room commented. The thought stuck with Probst as he picked up his notebook and walked to the North Parking Lot to attend his meeting. Probst took a sidewalk alongside Route 27, which runs near the Pentagon's western face. Traffic was at a standstill because of a road accident. Then, at about 9:35 a.m., he saw the airliner in the cloudless September sky. American Airlines Flight 77 approached from the west, coming in low over the nearby five-story Navy Annex on a hill overlooking the Pentagon. He has lights off, wheels up, nose down," Probst recalled. The plane seemed to be accelerating directly toward him. He froze. "I knew I was dead," he said later. "The only thing I thought was, 'Damn, my wife has to go to another funeral, and I'm not going to see my two boys again.'" He dove to his right. He recalls the engine passing on one side of him, about six feet away. The plane's right wing went through a generator trailer "like butter," Probst said. The starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blew apart. He still can't remember the sound of the explosion. Sometimes the memory starts to come back when he hears a particularly low-flying airliner heading into nearby Reagan National Airport, or when military jets fly over a burial at Arlington National Cemetery. Most of the time, though, his memory is silent. "It was pretty horrible," he said of the noiseless images he carries inside him, of the jet vanishing in a cloud of smoke and dust, and bits of metal and concrete drifting down like confetti. On either side of him, three streetlights had been sheared in half by the airliner's wings at 12 to 15 feet above the ground. An engine had clipped the antenna off a Jeep Grand Cherokee stalled in traffic not far away.

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Directly observed the engine hitting the wall and the wing clipping the generator.




NAME: Lon Rains

QUOTE: "In light traffic the drive up Interstate 395 from Springfield to downtown Washington takes no more than 20 minutes. But that morning, like many others, the traffic slowed to a crawl just in front of the Pentagon. With the Pentagon to the left of my van at about 10 o'clock on the dial of a clock, I glanced at my watch to see if I was going to be late for my appointment. At that moment I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound that began behind me and stopped suddenly in front of me and to my left. In fractions of a second I heard the impact and an explosion. The next thing I saw was the fireball. I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane. Friends and colleagues have asked me if I felt a shock wave and I honestly do not know. I felt something, but I don't know if it was a shock wave or the fact that I jumped so hard I strained against the seat belt and shoulder harness and was thrown back into my seat."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: I-395. Again.




NAME: James S. Robbins

QUOTE: James S Robbins a national-security analyst & 'nationalreviewonline' contributor: "I was standing, looking out my large office window, which faces west and from six stories up has a commanding view of the Potomac and the Virginia heights." "The Pentagon is about a mile and half distant in the center of the tableau. I was looking directly at it when the aircraft struck. The sight of the 757 diving in at an unrecoverable angle is frozen in my memory, but at the time. " I did not immediately comprehend what I was witnessing. There was a silvery flash, an explosion, and a dark, mushroom shaped cloud rose over the building. I froze, gaping for a second until the sound of the detonation, a sharp pop at that distance, shook me out of it. "

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Hear that, LyteBrite? "Unrecoverable angle". In otherwords: flyover = impossible. Put that in your pipe and blow it.




NAME: Arthur Rosati

QUOTE: Arthur Rosati, another security officer and an army reservist, was in a meeting when the plane hit. "I ran down the hallway and there was smoke everywhere. You could smell the jet fuel, it was unbearable"

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: jet fuel





NAME: Rob Schickler

QUOTE: Rob Schickler, a Baylor University 2001 graduate and Arlington, Va. resident, said. "A plane flew over my house," (one mile away from the Pentagon). "It was loud, but not unusual because the [Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport] is by my house, on the other side of the Pentagon. Occasionally planes that miss the landing fly over my house." "A few seconds later, there was this sonic boom," he said. "The house shook, the windows were vibrating." "There was a hole in the building, and you could smell it in the air. It's a beautiful day, but you can smell the burning concrete and burning jet fuel."

WHY HE...ah, screw it, you know what? No more jet fuel stories. I think you get the point.




NAME: Noel Sepulveda

QUOTE: Noel Sepulveda, a Master Sgt. received the awards during a special ceremony at the Pentagon April 15. He left Bolling Air Force Base, D.C., for a meeting at the Pentagon, only to be told it was cancelled. Walking back to his motorcycle he saw a commercial airliner coming from the direction of Henderson Hall the Marine Corps headquarters.. It "flew above a nearby hotel and drop its landing gear. The plane's right wheel struck a light pole, causing it to fly at a 45-degree angle", he said. The plane tried to recover, but hit a second light pole and continued flying at an angle. "You could hear the engines being revved up even higher," The plane dipped its nose and crashed into the southwest side of the Pentagon. "The right engine hit high, the left engine hit low. For a brief moment, you could see the body of the plane sticking out from the side of the building. Then a ball of fire came from behind it." An explosion followed, sending Sepulveda flying against a light pole. "if the airliner had not hit the light poles, it would have slammed into the Pentagon's 9th and 10th corridor "A" ring, and the loss of life would have been greater."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Hit light poles. Nose angled down as it was flying in, thus could not have pulled up to perform flyover. Saw engines hit.




NAME: Jack Singleton

QUOTE: "Where the plane came in was really at the construction entrance," says Jack Singleton, president of Singleton Electric Co. Inc., Gaithersburg MD, the Wedge One electrical subcontractor. "The plane's left wing actually came in near the ground and the right wing was tilted up in the air. That right wing went directly over our trailer, so if that wing had not tilted up, it would have hit the trailer. My foreman, Mickey Bell, had just walked out of the trailer and was walking toward the construction entrance."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Tilted wings = couldn't have flown over without losing a wing.




NAME: Jim Sutherland

QUOTE: Jim Sutherland, a mortgage broker, was on his way to the Pentagon when he saw "... a white 737 twin-engine plane with multicolored trim fly 50 feet over I-395 in a straight line, striking the side of the Pentagon.. "

WHY HE...I-395




NAME: Donald Timmerman

QUOTE: Donald "Tim" Timmerman, watched from across Interstate 395: "I was looking out the window; I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon, in a corner apartment, so I have quite a panorama. And being next to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike, and as it went by the Sheraton Hotel, the pilot added power to the engines. I heard it pull up a little bit more, and then I lost it behind a building. And then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames. It was horrible."

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Describes the crash in detail. So there's no way he was mistaken as to whether the plane hit..



And last but not least...


NAME: Lyte "Acid" Trip

WHY HE PWNS THE PENTACON: Claims that an explosion capable of destroying the reinforced concrete of the Pentagon occurred at the SAME TIME that an airliner flew VERY LOW overhead. In order to not be destroyed, the plane would've had to be armored like an A-10 Thunderbolt. None of the eyewitnesses here describe seeing and A-10. Sorry, Lyte. You lose.

[Bobert]

I haven't heard that pieces of 14 different knives were recovered from Flight 93. Your link doesn't discuss that. Can you please post the info backing up this claim. Thanks.
Out or curiosity what difference would that make?

[johnny karate]

AP reporter Dave Winslow says he saw the tail of a large airliner plow right into the Pentagon.

And yet we don't see Winslow in the ranks of the Truth Movement, proclaiming he doesn't actually believe AA77 crashed into Pentagon.

Do you think it's because he's a coward in the same way you've characterized the FDNY and the pilots of AA77 as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4529778&postcount=46)?

Is it your opinion that every single eyewitness, first responder, and investigator who hasn't revealed "The Truth" (which would pretty much be all of them) is nothing more than a coward?

When you accused the FDNY of cowardice (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164), do you think the NWO purposely scheduled the most cowardly members of the FDNY to work on 9/11, or is just that you think all firefighters are cowards?

I'm just curious to know how deep your paranoia and irrational hatred goes.

[16.5]

If you are so keen to knowing the truth(i assume as a good American you are)

Tell your buddies like Mangoose to not vomit out lies(the likes of which i pointed out in the post previous to yours.
Dont worry, i dont expect you to comment on such absurd lies, as i know you are busy defending others like them.

Wow, tough guy is throwing down. Say, Roundhead, here is what a fellow no planer (and CIT confidant) states that AP reporter Dave Winslow said:

"I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon."

http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/witnesses.html

Why are you vomiting out lies into this thread?

Still waiting for Aldo's interview with Probst.

[johnny karate]

If you are so keen to knowing the truth(i assume as a good American you are)

Is that the version of "truth" that includes characterizing the FDNY as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

Could you please explain how making firefighters out to be cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164) is in any way behaving like a "good American"?

[roundhead]

And yet we don't see Winslow in the ranks of the Truth Movement, proclaiming he doesn't actually believe AA77 crashed into Pentagon.

Do you think it's because he's a coward in the same way you've characterized the FDNY and the pilots of AA77 as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4529778&postcount=46)?

Is is your opinion that every single eyewitness, first responder, and investigator who hasn't revealed "The Truth" (which would pretty much be all of them) is nothing more than a coward?

When you accused the FDNY of cowardice (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164), do you think the NWO purposely scheduled the most cowardly members of the FDNY to work on 9/11, or is just that you think all firefighters are cowards?

I'm just curious to know how deep your paranoia and irrational hatred goes.


Its funny a guy like you would question anybody else on the planet's sanity...thats mighty funny.

Regarding Winslow, why no commet from you on why the misrepresentation of what he ACTUALLY said continues to be spread by untruthers like yourself.Selective lying is fine with you, it would appear.

You should check your own diaper before you complain of a smell coming from somewhere else

[twinstead]

What about all those quotes above?

[beachnut]

You should check your own diaper before you complain of a smell coming from somewhere else
Your A game?

Boger saw 77 impact the Pentagon and CIT verified he stands by his story.

[johnny karate]

Its funny a guy like you would question anybody else on the planet's sanity...thats mighty funny.

So you think it's sane to characterize the FDNY as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

Regarding Winslow, why no commet from you on why the misrepresentation of what he ACTUALLY said continues to be spread by untruthers like yourself.Selective lying is fine with you, it would appear.[/url]

I've never made any assertions one way or the other about Winslow, nor am I resposible for what other people say about him.

What I want to know is if you think his silence on this issue is an indicator of the same cowardice you've already attributed to the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[beachnut]

4. The lack of airplane debris recovered at the site. . The whole plane, all the parts are insight inside and outside the Pentagon and being a trained aircraft accident investigator, there is nothing odd; you just lack the knowledge to recognize a crashed aircraft impact at 530 mph. This is the dumbest statement made by 911Truth, CIT and p4t. The pilots for truth should know better but pilots are just people and some of them entertain dirt dumb ideas; the very ideas you post in disrespect to the passenger murdered by terrorist; the terrorist you apologize for.

[roundhead]

Your A game?

Boger saw 77 impact the Pentagon and CIT verified he stands by his story.

You cant have it both ways Beachie........


If the plane flew right at Boger, as you are well aware he said it did, then it was without a doubt NOC, and couldnt have been on the path to clip the light poles, or do the damage the Pentagon performance study said it did.

You want to believe Boger, Beachie, but you dont seem to be aware of the implications that go along with believing what he said.

NOC = your fairy tale isnt true.

[roundhead]

So you think it's sane to characterize the FDNY as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?



I've never made any assertions one way or the other about Winslow, nor am I resposible for what other people say about him.

What I want to know is if you think his silence on this issue is an indicator of the same cowardice you've already attributed to the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?


Quit derailing my thread..

The post you keep pathologically linking to, is a quote from a Major that says the fire dept was threatened.
I didnt say they were, the person i quoted said they were.

You seem unable, after all this time, to be able to comprehend that distinct difference. It doesnt surprise me that you cant.
Hopefully, one of these days your parents will tire of you being on the computer in their basement, and wasting bandwith.

[roundhead]

The whole plane, all the parts are insight inside and outside the Pentagon and being a trained aircraft accident investigator, there is nothing odd; you just lack the knowledge to recognize a crashed aircraft impact at 530 mph. This is the dumbest statement made by 911Truth, CIT and p4t. The pilots for truth should know better but pilots are just people and some of them entertain dirt dumb ideas; the very ideas you post in disrespect to the passenger murdered by terrorist; the terrorist you apologize for.

I dont know where those people were murdered at, but it sure wasnt from impact into the Pentagon. The fact you claim to be an accident investigator, and still excrete this vomitus is mighty unnerving.

[johnny karate]

You cant have it both ways Beachie........


If the plane flew right at Boger, as you are well aware he said it did, then it was without a doubt NOC, and couldnt have been on the path to clip the light poles, or do the damage the Pentagon performance study said it did.

You want to believe Boger, Beachie, but you dont seem to be aware of the implications that go along with believing what he said.

NOC = your fairy tale isnt true.

And yet we don't see Boger in the ranks of the Truth Movement, proclaiming he doesn't actually believe AA77 crashed into Pentagon.

Do you think it's because he's a coward in the same way you've characterized the FDNY as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[johnny karate]

The post you keep pathologically linking to, is a quote from a Major that says the fire dept was threatened.
I didnt say they were, the person i quoted said they were.

What a silly and easily debunkable lie:
I stated they had been threatened, and posted a quote that supports my contention.

[roundhead]

Wow, tough guy is throwing down. Say, Roundhead, here is what a fellow no planer (and CIT confidant) states that AP reporter Dave Winslow said:

"I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon."

http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/witnesses.html

Why are you vomiting out lies into this thread?

Still waiting for Aldo's interview with Probst.


I posted what the guy(Winslow) actually said. The fact you dont like it doesnt deter me from pointing it out as a lie.

I dont know what Killtowns point of reference is, and dont care. I just posted the fact about Winslow's statement.

[johnny karate]

I dont know where those people were murdered at, but it sure wasnt from impact into the Pentagon. The fact you claim to be an accident investigator, and still excrete this vomitus is mighty unnerving.

What about the actual accident invesigators, none of whom have claimed AA77 didn't hit the Pentagon?

Do you think they are lying because they are cowards the way you think the FDNY are cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[johnny karate]

I posted what the guy(Winslow) actually said. The fact you dont like it doesnt deter me from pointing it out as a lie.

I dont know what Killtowns point of reference is, and dont care. I just posted the fact about Winslow's statement.

You still haven't answered my question regarding Winslow:
Do you think his silence on this issue is an indicator of the same cowardice you've already attributed to the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[T.A.M.]

OMG, I had forgotten roundhead was a CIT cult member. Well, now I realize (I had forgotten) why I had him on ignore.

Say hello to Craig for me Roundhead, and while you're at it, ask him when his "earth shattering" evidence is gonna give us those Subpoena's he promised us some 300-400 days ago.

TAM:)

[beachnut]

3. The absurdity of a supposedly well planned operation doing its best to cause the least amount of damage to the Pentagon, and flying through a forest of obstacles to do so. This is your delusion? Least amount of damage? Once again you are saying the military is in on 911. You accuse others of murder while apologizing for your terrorist friends who murdered people on 911. Is your ignorance on 911 only surpassed by your gullibility?

Hani flew directly as he could to impact the Pentagon; he had no idea he was hitting the posts in his last second of flight, before he perceived he had clipped post, his brain was mush; much like all the brains at p4t, pure mush on 911 issues with zero evidence, and no theories to go with their implied lies.

Boger watched as others did and saw 77 impact the Pentagon. DNA proves 77 impacted the Pentagon. The FDR proves 77 impacted the Pentagon, and RADAR supports this. You are spreading a lie based on your lack of knowledge.

[roundhead]

And yet we don't see Boger in the ranks of the Truth Movement, proclaiming he doesn't actually believe AA77 crashed into Pentagon.

Do you think it's because he's a coward in the same way you've characterized the FDNY as cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?


I dont believe the official story any further than i can throw it.

But look through my home or on my computer, and you will find no "truther membership cards" that you seem to think must exist.

I think its likely people can be "silent truthers" so that they dont get hounded
By "liar movement" pit bulls like yourself.

Kinda like closet Cub fans:D

[beachnut]

I dont believe the official story any further than i can throw it.

But look through my home or on my computer, and you will find no "truther membership cards" that you seem to think must exist.

I think its likely people can be "silent truthers" so that they dont get hounded
By "liar movement" pit bulls like yourself.

Kinda like closet Cub fans:D
you poorly apologize for terrorist who did 911 with your half-baked ideas, lies, hearsay, and fantasy.

You failed after 7 years to present your case to the world, and you are stuck typing out lies to skeptics who know you have no evidence and you ignore evidence. Cherry pick testimony to support drug induced lies and no theories from the failed p4t cult.

I need no official story to understand 911 and doubt you would understand the report I posted and you ignored.
Hounded; you lack evidence and accuse the military of murder; hounded. You should be ashamed to support your delusions with nothing but you own failed opinions.
You can’t explain how 77 hit the lampposts or why it was seen by CIT verified witnesses hitting the Pentagon. Gee, you sure are doing a very bad job trying to apologize for terrorist who flew 77 into the Pentagon and after 7 years you should not be spewing this lie made up by failed aviators and CIT the worse investigators in the universe.

You blame the military for a cover-up, the FAA, the NTSB, the FBI, and more just to make your failed ideas your reality. You got a delusion and the terrorists you apologize for are laughing at you.

[johnny karate]

I think its likely people can be "silent truthers" so that they dont get hounded
By "liar movement" pit bulls like yourself.

Do you not find it a bit ironic to accuse me of being a liar when you got caught in one not thirty minutes ago (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532355&postcount=103)?

And these "silent truthers" you speak of, where do rank them on the Coward Scale? Are they more or less cowardly than you think the FDNY are (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[stateofgrace]

I dont believe the official story any further than i can throw it.



"Offical story" ?

Is that the one you imagine Bush and his co fed us all or is it the one that was provided by all those that were there on the day and is backed up by logic, fact and science?

Can you please quantify exactly what you mean by "official story "?

[roundhead]

This is your delusion? Least amount of damage? Once again you are saying the military is in on 911. You accuse others of murder while apologizing for your terrorist friends who murdered people on 911. Is your ignorance on 911 only surpassed by your gullibility?

Hani flew directly as he could to impact the Pentagon; he had no idea he was hitting the posts in his last second of flight, before he perceived he had clipped post, his brain was mush; much like all the brains at p4t, pure mush on 911 issues with zero evidence, and no theories to go with their implied lies.

Boger watched as others did and saw 77 impact the Pentagon. DNA proves 77 impacted the Pentagon. The FDR proves 77 impacted the Pentagon, and RADAR supports this. You are spreading a lie based on your lack of knowledge.


Yes, they attacked the part of the Pentagon which had just been reinforced, had the least amount of people in proximity to it(in fact people were scheduled to be returned to that section Sept 12TH)and was undergoing renovation. The "least likely" place that could possibly be chosen by big bad terrorists.

The fact the "Hani" character had no idea of what obstacles were in his way sure doesnt make any sense to me.
As he was in the area a while before 9/11(remember he tried renting a plane in that area before 9/11)it would seem to me such a well planned operation as this "seemed" to be, that totally outfoxed our whole military apparatus, would case the area around the Pnttagon prior to 9/11 and note any obstacles that might affect their mission.And figure out how to do the MOST damage, not the least.
Doesnt that make perfect sense to you?

[16.5]

I posted what the guy(Winslow) actually said. The fact you dont like it doesnt deter me from pointing it out as a lie.

I dont know what Killtowns point of reference is, and dont care. I just posted the fact about Winslow's statement.

No actually, Champ, you pointed out a quote from a book. I pointed you to a quote from a Truther web site. I can also point you to AP press reports from 9/11/01 where they also said the same thing.

So: 1. take back your baseless claim that he lied.

2. tell your fat pal aldo to make with the Probst interview pronto.

[stateofgrace]

Yes, they attacked the part of the Pentagon which had just been reinforced, had the least amount of people in proximity to it(in fact people were scheduled to be returned to that section Sept 12TH)and was undergoing renovation. The "least likely" place that could possibly be chosen by big bad terrorists.

The fact the "Hani" character had no idea of what obstacles were in his way sure doesnt make any sense to me.
As he was in the area a while before 9/11(remember he tried renting a plane in that area before 9/11)it would seem to me such a well planned operation as this "seemed" to be, that totally outfoxed our whole military apparatus, would case the area around the Pnttagon prior to 9/11 and note any obstacles that might affect their mission.And figure out how to do the MOST damage, not the least.
Doesnt that make perfect sense to you?

Let me get this straight , I are about to hijack a plane and slam it into a landmark building and you reckon I should scout the area before hand just to make sure that there are no obstacles in my way?

Does that make perfect sense to you?

[roundhead]

you poorly apologize for terrorist who did 911 with your half-baked ideas, lies, hearsay, and fantasy.

You failed after 7 years to present your case to the world, and you are stuck typing out lies to skeptics who know you have no evidence and you ignore evidence. Cherry pick testimony to support drug induced lies and no theories from the failed p4t cult.

I need no official story to understand 911 and doubt you would understand the report I posted and you ignored.
Hounded; you lack evidence and accuse the military of murder; hounded. You should be ashamed to support your delusions with nothing but you own failed opinions.
You can’t explain how 77 hit the lampposts or why it was seen by CIT verified witnesses hitting the Pentagon. Gee, you sure are doing a very bad job trying to apologize for terrorist who flew 77 into the Pentagon and after 7 years you should not be spewing this lie made up by failed aviators and CIT the worse investigators in the universe.

You blame the military for a cover-up, the FAA, the NTSB, the FBI, and more just to make your failed ideas your reality. You got a delusion and the terrorists you apologize for are laughing at you.

You need to read a history book once in a while.
A good start would be the USS Liberty, where the US Govt had no problem turning their back on its own sailors (and allowing our servicemembers to die for zero reason)just so we wouldnt have to bring shame on an ally.It makes me sick to my belly(as a former sailor myself)And you enjoy slurping up all the slop from somebody like that.
And even called off planes on their way to save these same servicemembers. Guys like you are the sort who likely call the survivorsw liars.

Reality and you are way out of step, pal.

Quit standing by the mailbox waiting for you SSI check, and yank your head out of the sand

[beachnut]

3. The "evaporation" of video footage showing(or more correctly, not showing)impact from 77 into the Pentagon. Was it thermite that evaporated your videos of delusion. Why are you making up delusions?

Why would anyone be video taping the Pentagon during the attack. There was only one video of Flight 11 and that was only because the person heard 11 flying and looked up to tape it. The Pentagon approach for 77 was low and less chance to hear the engines in time to video tape the impact. Your lie is weak, supported only by hearsay, cherry picked stupid, and fantasy. Paranoid anti-government nut case idea pushers at CIT and p4t join you in your delusion.

[lapman]

Yes, they attacked the part of the Pentagon which had just been reinforced, had the least amount of people in proximity to it(in fact people were scheduled to be returned to that section Sept 12TH)and was undergoing renovation. The "least likely" place that could possibly be chosen by big bad terrorists.One problem. That was the side that was toward the flight path.

The fact the "Hani" character had no idea of what obstacles were in his way sure doesnt make any sense to me.Of course not. You're not a suicide pilot. The charts list the major obstacles that are around that would be in the way.
As he was in the area a while before 9/11(remember he tried renting a plane in that area before 9/11)it would seem to me such a well planned operation as this "seemed" to be, that totally outfoxed our whole military apparatus, would case the area around the Pnttagon prior to 9/11 and note any obstacles that might affect their mission.And figure out how to do the MOST damage, not the least.
Doesnt that make perfect sense to you?
Where does it say that they wanted to do the most damage when just flying an airliner into the symbol of American Military might would be enough? It's easier to just fly into the building than try to pick a side, maneuver and then hit it. Question for you, were the Kamikaze's briefed on all the obstacles that could be in their way before they took off?

[roundhead]

This is your delusion? Least amount of damage? Once again you are saying the military is in on 911. You accuse others of murder while apologizing for your terrorist friends who murdered people on 911. Is your ignorance on 911 only surpassed by your gullibility?

Hani flew directly as he could to impact the Pentagon; he had no idea he was hitting the posts in his last second of flight, before he perceived he had clipped post, his brain was mush; much like all the brains at p4t, pure mush on 911 issues with zero evidence, and no theories to go with their implied lies.

Boger watched as others did and saw 77 impact the Pentagon. DNA proves 77 impacted the Pentagon. The FDR proves 77 impacted the Pentagon, and RADAR supports this. You are spreading a lie based on your lack of knowledge.


DNA from who or what??

The perps said it was 77 DNA, i have no valid reason to believe them. None.

So you think this "Hani character " or the operation planners never cased the place, or had any clue of where they were going to fly?

Fantasize much??????????????????????

[stateofgrace]

DNA from who or what??

The perps said it was 77 DNA, i have no valid reason to believe them. None.


Are you suggesting the forensic scientists who examined the remains of the passengers from flight 77 are involved in a mass murder cover up?

[kookbreaker]

You need to read a history book once in a while.


You first.

[16.5]

DNA from who or what??

The perps said it was 77 DNA, i have no valid reason to believe them. None.

So you think this "Hani character " or the operation planners never cased the place, or had any clue of where they were going to fly?

Fantasize much??????????????????????

And people wonder why CIT/Pfft are the laughingstocks of the Twoof. Hand wave it all away....

What do these fools think they are going to accomplish?

Anyway, make with the Probst interview Roundhead.

[johnny karate]

Are you suggesting the forensic scientists who examined the remains of the passengers from flight 77 are involved in a mass murder cover up?

Of course he is. I'm sure he thinks they are all cowards in the same way he thinks the FDNY are cowards (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164).

[johnny karate]

And people wonder why CIT/Pfft are the laughingstocks of the Twoof. Hand wave it all away....

What do these fools think they are going to accomplish?

Slandering the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164) seems to be roundhead's only notable accomplishment.

[A W Smith]

roundhead, Do I need to report you for derailing your own thread? I along with many others addressed the 17 foot 8 inch distance from the lower lip of the engines, (one of which clipped a concrete curb) to the top of the fuselage. Will you be addressing that post (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89) which also addresses your claim of no witnesses? or will you continue to flee by posting off topic?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89


Address or concede, or if you cant, let one of your CIT buddies share your account.

[roundhead]

roundhead, Do I need to report you for derailing your own thread? I along with many others addressed the 17 foot 8 inch distance from the lower lip of the engines, (one of which clipped a concrete curb) to the top of the fuselage. Will you be addressing that post (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89) which also addresses your claim of no witnesses? or will you continue to flee by posting off topic?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89


Address or concede, or if you cant, let one of your CIT buddies share your account.


The top of the rear stabiliser is part of the planes silhouette also. How far is the top of that from the bottom of the engines.And where did that huge piece go. It surely didnt penetrate the wall

[beachnut]

You need to read a history book once in a while.
A good start would be the USS Liberty, where the US Govt had no problem turning their back on its own sailors (and allowing our servicemembers to die for zero reason)just so we wouldnt have to bring shame on an ally.It makes me sick to my belly(as a former sailor myself)And you enjoy slurping up all the slop from somebody like that.
And even called off planes on their way to save these same servicemembers. Guys like you are the sort who likely call the survivorsw liars.

Reality and you are way out of step, pal.

Quit standing by the mailbox waiting for you SSI check, and yank your head out of the sand
No former sailor would pick drugged induced lies from CIT and blame me and my fellow soldiers on duty on 911 for murder done by terrorists like you do. Your lack of knowledge is pathetic as you spew the lie of 77 not impacting the Pentagon where the first to die from the military on duty were sailors.

An aircraft impact the Pentagon and killed sailors because terrorist flew the plane and killed them and you make up lies. How pathetic you claiming to be a veteran and your accuse others of murder for the acts of terrorist. Pathetic; I served 28 years and you are only the second veteran to not use logic and knowledge to come to conclusions on 911. .

You are a former sailor; then you would know the Navy took great care to verify the DNA samples of its soldier killed in the Pentagon, but then you are a lair accusing other for the acts of terrorist turning your back on your fellow military who died on 911. You post lies, you haven no evidence, you are a terrorist apologist and not the patriotic veteran you think you are by choosing delusion over reason.

Just like a no evidence cult member to bring up USS Liberty attacked by Israel. You can’t even figure that one out. Good for you zero for two.

[A W Smith]

The top of the rear stabiliser is part of the planes silhouette also. How far is the top of that from the bottom of the engines.And where did that huge piece go. It surely didnt penetrate the wall

Exactly how strong do you think a rear stabilizer is?

http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/587crash/splash_image.jpg

you really expected it to fully penetrate the pentagon wall?
Really?


Goalpost move highlighted in red

I will humor your goalpost move for this post at least.
What do you suppose left these scars in the reinforced masonry of the pentagon facade Roundhead?

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/impactscarpentagon77.jpg

Care to explain how this "Hollywood special effect shock and awe pyrotechnic display" can explode within the building and then throw debris back into itself? Enlighten us Roundhead. We are all at the edge of our seats.

[Bobert]

Exactly how strong do you think a rear stabilizer is?

http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/587crash/splash_image.jpg

you really expected it to fully penetrate the pentagon wall?
Really?


Goalpost move highlighted in red

I will humor your goalpost move for this post at least.
What do you suppose left these scars in the reinforced masonry of the pentagon facade Roundhead?

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/impactscarpentagon77.jpg

Care to explain how this "Hollywood special effect shock and awe pyrotechnic display" can explode within the building and then throw debris back into itself? Enlighten us Roundhead. We are all at the edge of our seats.

I doubt you will ever get a clear answer but I admire your patience in attempting to get one from the CIT CULT.

[T.A.M.]

DNA from who or what??

The perps said it was 77 DNA, i have no valid reason to believe them. None.

So you think this "Hani character " or the operation planners never cased the place, or had any clue of where they were going to fly?

Fantasize much??????????????????????

So now the coroners office and the FBI are also "in on it"?

You got a list of all the agencies and people that are a part of the Big Bad Conspiracy?

and you accuse others of fantasizing.

TAM:)

[Gaspode]

Some posts moved to AAH (http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=58).

Keep it civil and on-topic from now on please.

[twinstead]

To keep the list smaller, I think Roundhead should give us a list of people who he doesn't think are "in on it".

[HeyLeroy]

roundhead:

How do you reconcile the story of Steve Anderson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Gary Bauer with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mickey Bell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Richard Benedetto with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Brian Birdwell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald R. Bouchoux with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Bright with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lisa Burgess with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Wayne T. Day with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Captain Michael Defina with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Michael DiPaula with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Penny Elgas with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Walker Lee Evey with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Ken Ford with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kat Gaines with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Afework Hagos with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Joe Harrington with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Albert Hemphill with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jerry Henson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Will Jarvis with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Terrance Kean with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Steven Kirk with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lincoln Liebner with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of David Marra with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Stephen McGraw with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kirk Milburn with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Vin Narayanan with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mary Ann Owens with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Steve Patterson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Daniel C. Pfeilstucker Jr. with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Frank Probst with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lon Rains with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of James S. Robbins with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Arthur Rosati with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Rob Schickler with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Noel Sepulveda with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jack Singleton with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jim Sutherland with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald Timmerman with CIT's version of events?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2814163&postcount=348

[twinstead]

It's easy; they're all in on it.

[Mangoose]

Hey Mangoose....You gotta do better than that deceit filled post you made.

Winslow actually said exactly this:

David Winslow, a reporter with AP's Broadcast News Center in Washington, was sitting in his tenth-floor apartment, looking out at the capital, when he saw a jumbo tail go by him. "I heard this enormous sound of turbulence. . .As I turned to my right, I saw a jumbo tail go by me along Route 395. It was like the rear end of the fuselage was riding on 395. I just saw the tail go whoosh right past me. In a split second, you heard this boom. A combination of a crack and a thud. It rattled my windows. I thought they were going to blow out. Then came an enormous fireball."

Which you and other OCT slurpers somehow turn into this:

AP reporter Dave Winslow says he saw the tail of a large airliner plow right into the Pentagon.


Hey roundhead, you're a complete and utter idiot.

What you quoted above is from Winslow's account given a year later in The Washingtonian (September 2002). What I paraphrased was from Winslow's account on the day itself (quoted in The Guardian, 9/12/2001): "AP reporter Dave Winslow also saw the crash. He said, 'I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon" (source (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/12/expertopinions.charlieporteronmensfashion)). That corresponds to the original radio report on 1010 Morning News (WINS-AM), given at 9:45:10 a.m. The Video Monitoring Services of America summary states: "AP reporter says saw tail end of large airliner plunge into the building." Compare with what I wrote.

Next time, before you hurl forth vile accusations of deceit and dishonesty, check your facts first.

[Disbelief]

Exactly how strong do you think a rear stabilizer is?

http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/587crash/splash_image.jpg

you really expected it to fully penetrate the pentagon wall?
Really?


In the case of the WTC, the TM contends that the "thin aluminum" should not have penetrated the building, yet at the Pentagon the same material should be left in huge chunks. They appear to have never actually been around planes before.



Care to explain how this "Hollywood special effect shock and awe pyrotechnic display" can explode within the building and then throw debris back into itself? Enlighten us Roundhead. We are all at the edge of our seats.
[/COLOR][/COLOR]

Maybe it is "Suck-a Boom" to go along with the "Hush-a-Boom" used at the WTC?

[Bananaman]

Blimey, whatever Rounhead's drinking remind me to never to try it. Jesus, I've read some truther drivel in my time but he takes the biscuit.

The sheer mixture of base ignorance, eye-popping lies and unapologetic aggression are equalled only by his masturbatory-like arrogance. It's quite a spectacle in a freak-show at the circus type way. I don't think I'd even let minors under the age of 16 peer into his cage. It might make them cry and give them nightmares.

When's Roundhead going to notice his Emperor has no clothes on? My guess is he's too far gone for that ever to happen. Or on too many drugs.

God, it just makes you shake your head and be glad that there are so few unfortunates like that in the world.

Bananaman.

[Jackanory]

I just wonder if Roundhead smiles when he lies.

[HeyLeroy]

Blimey, whatever Rounhead's drinking remind me to never to try it. Jesus, I've read some truther drivel in my time but he takes the biscuit.

The sheer mixture of base ignorance, eye-popping lies and unapologetic aggression are equalled only by his masturbatory-like arrogance. It's quite a spectacle in a freak-show at the circus type way. I don't think I'd even let minors under the age of 16 peer into his cage. It might make them cry and give them nightmares.

When's Roundhead going to notice his Emperor has no clothes on? My guess is he's too far gone for that ever to happen. Or on too many drugs.

God, it just makes you shake your head and be glad that there are so few unfortunates like that in the world.

Bananaman.

You never encountered stundie over at the old screwloosechange forum, didja?

Good times, good times.

[HeyLeroy]

Bump for roundhead.

roundhead:

How do you reconcile the story of Steve Anderson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Gary Bauer with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mickey Bell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Richard Benedetto with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Brian Birdwell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald R. Bouchoux with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Bright with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lisa Burgess with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Wayne T. Day with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Captain Michael Defina with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Michael DiPaula with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Penny Elgas with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Walker Lee Evey with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Ken Ford with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kat Gaines with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Afework Hagos with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Joe Harrington with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Albert Hemphill with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jerry Henson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Will Jarvis with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Terrance Kean with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Steven Kirk with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lincoln Liebner with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of David Marra with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Stephen McGraw with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kirk Milburn with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Vin Narayanan with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mary Ann Owens with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Steve Patterson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Daniel C. Pfeilstucker Jr. with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Frank Probst with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lon Rains with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of James S. Robbins with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Arthur Rosati with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Rob Schickler with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Noel Sepulveda with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jack Singleton with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jim Sutherland with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald Timmerman with CIT's version of events?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2814163&postcount=348

I see you've been on today; I guess the thread fell too far down the page for you to see.

[Bobert]

Can someone ask Roundhead if he and/or the other investigooglers (credit 911 files for that term:)) from the CIT CULT have been able to find the passengers of Flight 77 yet?

[A W Smith]

Bump for roundhead.



I see you've been on today; I guess the thread fell too far down the page for you to see.

I think he suffered a thread injury a few pages back. And you just poured salt on his wounds. Don't expect to see him back in this thread at least.

[HeyLeroy]

'S'okay. I know where to find the post.

[roundhead]

Exactly how strong do you think a rear stabilizer is?

http://www-tc.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/587crash/splash_image.jpg

you really expected it to fully penetrate the pentagon wall?
Really?


Goalpost move highlighted in red

I will humor your goalpost move for this post at least.
What do you suppose left these scars in the reinforced masonry of the pentagon facade Roundhead?

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/impactscarpentagon77.jpg

Care to explain how this "Hollywood special effect shock and awe pyrotechnic display" can explode within the building and then throw debris back into itself? Enlighten us Roundhead. We are all at the edge of our seats.



I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

[johnny karate]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

And yet not a single eyewitness, first responder, or crash scene investigator has claimed AA77 did not strike the Pentagon.

Do you suppose this is because they are all cowards coerced into silence the same way you believe the FDNY to be (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)?

[dtugg]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

Well, you might find it amazing that the universe doesn't operate based upon your incredibly ignorant and paranoid incredulity.

[Grizzly Bear]

Well, you might find it amazing that the universe doesn't operate based upon your incredibly ignorant and paranoid incredulity.

Obviously the wings and the tail should have landed neatly on the ground next to the walls on the exterior after being neatly removed from the body of the aircraft. Did you honestly think those Wiley Coyote impressions were done out of fiction? Get outta here... :D

[GlennB]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

How would you identify it when it would - necessarily - be smashed into 1000's of pieces by the impact ? :

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/pentagondebris2.jpg

[16.5]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

Detective Bill Wammock is the first to arrive on the scene. He recalls “nothing that resembled an airliner... we went on for hours, before we heard the news reports of a missing airliner, believing that we were dealing with a small airplane full of newspapers that had crashed. We saw no pieces of the aircraft that were larger than, maybe, a human hand. It did not look like a passenger aircraft.”

100% amazing.

[beachnut]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.
At 530 mph the tail section was destroyed. Small pieces are seen flying over the Pentagon, in the Pentagon, and out side the Pentagon.

You are thining about a 180 mph impact where big parts are left after the impact parts break up and cushion the blow for the larger remaining parts like this.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/tail1.jpg

But this next one is high speed; no big parts
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/impact1.jpg
This is a high speed impact with the ground, this is how an aircraft looks when it hits at speeds over 500 mph.

Here is an impact at less than 530 mph, and you can see how the plane is broken into smaller pieces. The same is true for Flight 77.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/f4s.jpg
The F-4 was going less than Flight 77 for speed but more than twice as fast as it would land or try to crash land at.


Please present some photos of planes that impacted an object head on at over 500 mph. So far people have humored your ignorance with photos of parts found after a 530 mph impact. Where is your evidence and support for the delusions you support?

[Reheat]

I can tell you after having walked through one or two high speed crash sites that what we saw/see at the Pentagon is exactly what they look like. Usually, the only big pieces are engines parts. It depends on the angle of impact as well as the speed.

Don't expect to find more than small unidentifiable (except to an expert) human being parts, no luggage, no intact seats and little else that can be identified by an amateur. The entire aircraft and it occupants are generally smashed into "little bitty" pieces.

On one crash site I walked through, the aircraft impacted open terrain in a very flat trajectory, but was at 500 KIAS +. The engines were the only big pieces. The largest piece of the two pilots was a jaw bone.

What was done in crashes of this sort in the past in order to provide human remains to families for burial was to give each a portion of the weight of the total human remains, usually considerable less than their live weight. Of course, now, remains can be identified by DNA, but I can assure they don't do DNA tests on every small piece they find.

I apologize for being so descriptive, but idiots need to realize that REAL PEOPLE died in these crashes. It's not a game for ignorant people to spout nonsense on the Internet.

[jaydeehess]

Interestingly, though the result of another horror, the crash yesterday of a single engine turboprop that killed 14 people was described by one of the first people on site. He said that he believed that the only people to die were the pilot and perhaps one other person. Why? Because he saw no evidence that the aircraft was large enough to hold over a dozen people describing the crash scene as being nothing but a crater in the ground. (the Pilatus PC 12/45 actually is only rated for 10 persons, it was possibly overloaded)

This is interesting for a few reasons, first he saw the plane come down and thus had time to identify the size of the aircraft. it was a single engine craft so he thought is was smaller than it actually was. In the case of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon this also comes into play where several people believed the aircraft to be smaller than a 757.

Next the witness describes the scene in a similar fashion as others at the Pentagon crash, that there was nothing that resembled a plane. Granted this was a much smaller aircraft but is was also moving much slower and did not enter a large office building.

If one looks at the pictures of the crash scene one simply cannot see an aircraft. Was this yet another 'planted' crash scene? Hunt the Pilatus?

[jaydeehess]

I agree with you 100%. No way that large stabilizer could go through the Pentagon. For that reason i find it 100% amazing not anything of it was visible outside the Pentagon, on the lawn, whatever.

I find it 100% amazing that you, or anyone else, would expect it to remain intact.

[DavidJames]

I find it 100% amazing that you, or anyone else, would expect it to remain intact.Considering 9/11 CTists like RH have no education, no training, no practical experience in anything related along with the fact that they seem to get their scientific knowledge from TV and movies, I'm not surprised at all.

[funk de fino]

Interestingly, though the result of another horror, the crash yesterday of a single engine turboprop that killed 14 people was described by one of the first people on site. He said that he believed that the only people to die were the pilot and perhaps one other person. Why? Because he saw no evidence that the aircraft was large enough to hold over a dozen people describing the crash scene as being nothing but a crater in the ground. (the Pilatus PC 12/45 actually is only rated for 10 persons, it was possibly overloaded)

This is interesting for a few reasons, first he saw the plane come down and thus had time to identify the size of the aircraft. it was a single engine craft so he thought is was smaller than it actually was. In the case of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon this also comes into play where several people believed the aircraft to be smaller than a 757.

Next the witness describes the scene in a similar fashion as others at the Pentagon crash, that there was nothing that resembled a plane. Granted this was a much smaller aircraft but is was also moving much slower and did not enter a large office building.

If one looks at the pictures of the crash scene one simply cannot see an aircraft. Was this yet another 'planted' crash scene? Hunt the Pilatus?

I saw a quote today where he actually said "there were no bodies"

[funk de fino]

Well, you might find it amazing that the universe doesn't operate based upon your incredibly ignorant and paranoid incredulity.

If you asked a small child what would happen, they would say it would bounce off. It seems a lot of the TM are on the same level.

[jaydeehess]

I saw a quote today where he actually said "there were no bodies"

Add that to the list of course.

Maybe this was all arranged just like the tanker fire under the roadway overpass and the crash of the Dash 8. All designed to falsely bolster to claims made about the events of 9/11.:rolleyes:

[Corsair 115]

Don't expect to find more than small unidentifiable (except to an expert) human being parts, no luggage, no intact seats and little else that can be identified by an amateur. The entire aircraft and it occupants are generally smashed into "little bitty" pieces.


Indeed.

Back in 1998, Swissair Flight 111 crashed into the waters off of Nova Scotia at a speed estimated to be approximately 348 mph. The force of the impact was in the area of 350 g's. Some two million pieces of debris were eventually recovered (about 98% of the aircraft) during the subsequent recovery effort.

[BenBurch]

Indeed.

Back in 1998, Swissair Flight 111 crashed into the waters off of Nova Scotia at a speed estimated to be approximately 348 mph. The force of the impact was in the area of 350 g's. Some two million pieces of debris were eventually recovered (about 98% of the aircraft) during the subsequent recovery effort.

Indeed. It was just off a very picturesque little place called "Peggy's Cove" of which I have nice memories. Imagining the horror washing ashore there for weeks was very disquieting.

[Egil]

Indeed. It was just off a very picturesque little place called "Peggy's Cove" of which I have nice memories. Imagining the horror washing ashore there for weeks was very disquieting.

There was also another grash, PSA 1771? that impacted the ground going about 700 miles per hour.

Same result, complete fragmentation of the plane resulting in a debris pattern that cannot be called a plane crash while objects such as photo IDs, the nuts suicide letter and his gun including a bit of his finger still in the trigger guard survived and were not destroyed in the crash.

There is an old WB Cartoon set place in WWII. Bugs Bunny is in a B-29 and there is a gremlin aboard. Hijinks ensue and the plane crashes rather comically, still intact and looking like a limp, dead bird. I think that is what Twoofers expect.

[AJM8125]

There was also another grash, PSA 1771? that impacted the ground going about 700 miles per hour.

Same result, complete fragmentation of the plane resulting in a debris pattern that cannot be called a plane crash while objects such as photo IDs, the nuts suicide letter and his gun including a bit of his finger still in the trigger guard survived and were not destroyed in the crash.

There is an old WB Cartoon set place in WWII. Bugs Bunny is in a B-29 and there is a gremlin aboard. Hijinks ensue and the plane crashes rather comically, still intact and looking like a limp, dead bird. I think that is what Twoofers expect.

Here ya go Egil. Welcome to the forum.

QrT6joi4gco

[16.5]

There was also another grash, PSA 1771? that impacted the ground going about 700 miles per hour.

Same result, complete fragmentation of the plane resulting in a debris pattern that cannot be called a plane crash while objects such as photo IDs, the nuts suicide letter and his gun including a bit of his finger still in the trigger guard survived and were not destroyed in the crash.

There is an old WB Cartoon set place in WWII. Bugs Bunny is in a B-29 and there is a gremlin aboard. Hijinks ensue and the plane crashes rather comically, still intact and looking like a limp, dead bird. I think that is what Twoofers expect.

I posted a quote from that crash scene investigation above. Here it is again:

"Detective Bill Wammock is the first to arrive on the scene. He recalls “nothing that resembled an airliner... we went on for hours, before we heard the news reports of a missing airliner, believing that we were dealing with a small airplane full of newspapers that had crashed. We saw no pieces of the aircraft that were larger than, maybe, a human hand. It did not look like a passenger aircraft.”

This quote, and the dozen other examples in this thread demonstrate how the Truthers are laughably incompetent. Remarkably, Roundhead is "kind of a big deal" at PFFT. You'd think that they would be embarrassed at someone expressing such an incredibly uninformed understanding of physics, and crash site investigations, but they keep skipping merrily along oblivious to the fact that PFFFT and their crack team of persistent internet fraudsters the CIT are laughingstocks.

[jaydeehess]

Remarkably, Roundhead is "kind of a big deal" at PFFT. You'd think that they would be embarrassed at someone expressing such an incredibly uninformed understanding of physics, and crash site investigations, but they keep skipping merrily along oblivious to the fact that PFFFT and their crack team of persistent internet fraudsters the CIT are laughingstocks.

Chaotic events completely stymie CT's. They live in a world of definitives where everything must be explained in minute detail. To them it is inconceivable that an aircraft can come apart into millions of pieces and yet a paper docuement survive, yet that is the nature of wildly chaotic events such as a plane impact. One could 'expect' that any particular docuement will not survive the event but because of the chaos of the situation one can also expect that not all docuements will be destroyed.

Same goes for the DFDR having a time block of data corrupted. The system is designed to avoid losing data but because of the nature of a highly violent and chaotic event that is a high speed aircraft crash it is simply impossible to have counter measures in place for every eventuality. The DFDR 'lost' the last 4-6 seconds of data.

If a CT cannot envision exactly how or why something occured they then search for solutions that fit their world view.

A passport survived a crash, must not have been on the plane but planted beforehand, cannot envision an FDR 'losing' data, it must be because the FDR data is falsely planted.
It wraps things up in their minds and they then simply refuse to consider the questions that arise from their contentions. For eg. if the Flt 77 DFDR is a 'plant' if fashioning a data set is so easy (and I suppose it would be) then why would TPTB create one that did not show data right up to impact? If the idea of the FDR 'plant' was to bolster the idea of an impact what would be gained by not creating it to actually include impact?

[twinstead]

For eg. if the Flt 77 DFDR is a 'plant' if fashioning a data set is so easy (and I suppose it would be) then why would TPTB create one that did not show data right up to impact? If the idea of the FDR 'plant' was to bolster the idea of an impact what would be gained by not creating it to actually include impact?

The most I can ever get out of most truthers when asked this question is something about how the NWO likes to "mess with us". :rolleyes:

[Egil]

Chaotic events completely stymie CT's. They live in a world of definitives where everything must be explained in minute detail. To them it is inconceivable that an aircraft can come apart into millions of pieces and yet a paper docuement survive, yet that is the nature of wildly chaotic events such as a plane impact. One could 'expect' that any particular docuement will not survive the event but because of the chaos of the situation one can also expect that not all docuements will be destroyed.

Same goes for the DFDR having a time block of data corrupted. The system is designed to avoid losing data but because of the nature of a highly violent and chaotic event that is a high speed aircraft crash it is simply impossible to have counter measures in place for every eventuality. The DFDR 'lost' the last 4-6 seconds of data.

If a CT cannot envision exactly how or why something occured they then search for solutions that fit their world view.

A passport survived a crash, must not have been on the plane but planted beforehand, cannot envision an FDR 'losing' data, it must be because the FDR data is falsely planted.
It wraps things up in their minds and they then simply refuse to consider the questions that arise from their contentions. For eg. if the Flt 77 DFDR is a 'plant' if fashioning a data set is so easy (and I suppose it would be) then why would TPTB create one that did not show data right up to impact? If the idea of the FDR 'plant' was to bolster the idea of an impact what would be gained by not creating it to actually include impact?


The Space Shuttle Columbia is a good example.

[jaydeehess]

The Space Shuttle Columbia is a good example.

Right, didn't some personal effects survive the fall?

[lapman]

Right, didn't some personal effects survive the fall?
Yes. Even some experiments survived.

[A W Smith]

Right, didn't some personal effects survive the fall?
yes a portion of a video tape from a personal video camera taken on board moments before the destruction. Was found laying by the side of a road in Palestine Texas.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/01/us/video-shows-astronauts-before-shuttle-disintegrated.html

[Egil]

Right, didn't some personal effects survive the fall?

If I remember correctly, they found Ilan Ramon's leg intact (well, except for the rest of him).

And the Columbia was exposed to far worse stress such as intense heat.

[JamesB]

Firefight, page 373:


For the first time, Regan's team saw something they had expected to see all along but had been scarce until then: recognizable airplane parts. They all thought they would find big pieces of the airliner laying everywhere, the way car parts end up strewn across a highway after a crash. But the physics of an airplane crash were obviously different: Mostly there was just tons of shredded metal and melted plastic.

Finally, they found several airplane seats, piled among the usual mounds of upturned office furniture and random wreckage. A couple of the seats still had bodies belted into them, which had already been found and marked for the FBI. Most of the workers inside were conscientious about not gawking, yet the seats attracted a lot of attention. They were the first objects the nonaviation experts had seen that unmistakably belonged to an airplane.

[jaydeehess]

Firefight, page 373:
A couple of the seats still had bodies belted into them, which had already been found and marked for the FBI


You know what that means don't you?:rolleyes:

[leftysergeant]

I have no doubt it didnt crash into the Pentacon.

Most "eyewitnesses" have been discredited as having actually "witnessed" any actual impact. This has been more than hashed out over and over.

And you have no proof of this BS. The witnesses have not been discredited by any person with a stronger sense of ethics than the typical babboon.

1. Guy "flying" 77 who couldnt even pass the sniff test controlling a Cessna just before 9/11.He is going to fly a jet the likes of which he has never sat in hundreds of miles, level it off, clip poles, and ram it into a building a ground level...lol..where do you people come up with such fantastic stories

He is known to have spent time on a flight simulator. Little hint for you faux aviation experts out there in Pffft Land. Flying with the assistance of a computer to which you have been trained to give the right commands is a hell of a lot easier than getting a purely mechanically-controlled airplane off the ground.

2. The unlikelyhood of 4 or 5 150 pound 5'6" or so(at most)boxcutter armed guys throwing Burlingame and his second out of the cockpit is absurd.Anybody who knows Burlinggame has been very straightforward on the record saying he would never have turned over the controls.


And he is just going to let the hijackers slowly whittle the heads off of a few passengers and flight attendants, not knowing that these were not just some crazies who wanted to make a statement like every other hijacker. Get a clue.

Heck i am very out of shape, but as big a guy as he was, i can assure you, three guys armed with only those little plastic box cutters would have at worst sliced me up a little before i would have maimed all three of them, of that i have zero doubt(especially knowing that some time before, planes had been slammed into the towers, and knowing my fate rested directly in my ability to overcome several platic knifes with one inch breakable blades in them)

Halucinate much? They had utility knives with steel blades, the same type that is the weapon of choice and a major cause of death among the Neds of glasgow, the murder capital of Europe. Your lack of militaryt training is showing through loud and clear. The crew had no idea at the time of the hijacking why they were being hijacked, That was Flt 93 Get you history straight before you get caught with your knickers to your knees again.

I would feel sorry for the "highjackers trying to throw me out of the cockpit with those being brandished.

Yeah, right. you are a better fighter than a trained guerilla who has the advantage of surprise over you. Have at it, Rambo.

3. The "evaporation" of video footage showing(or more correctly, not showing)impact from 77 into the Pentagon.

How many times need you be told that there is no reason for such to exist in the first place?

3. The absurdity of a supposedly well planned operation doing its best to cause the least amount of damage to the Pentagon, and flying through a forest of obstacles to do so.

There were more obstacles, like out buildings, varied relief, highway structures and such on any of the other approaches. Learn to read aa aerial view photograph of a target area.

4. The lack of airplane debris recovered at the site.

More stuff pulled out of the aft end of a bat. There was all kinds of stuff inside the building. A lot of it soon became indistiguishable from bits of aluminum office equipment, but a lot of stuff like egine pieces and landing gear and identifiable bodies of passengers were found inside. Get the history straight.


5.The fact the damage to the building doesnt fit with an airliner crash

Accordinmg to low-lifes like Stubblebine and the French criminal, liiar and disgrace to all military veterans Bunel, no, it doesn't match. To those of us who have served honorably in a fire-fighting position, and whose brains have not long-since shorted out, it matches perfectly.

6. Those darn NOC witnesses who dont place 77 where the Govt says it was.

"NOC?" WTF?

I am sure i could think of more reasons to be super sceptical of the OCT regarding the Pentagon, but the above are plenty enough.

Would be enough if any of it were based on facts that operate in this time/space continuum or were not pulled out of the underwear of certain Nazis and other impurities in the human gene pool like Hufschmid and Avery.

[leftysergeant]

Almost forgot to add:

The nose of the plane was dfown a little bit when it hit, so the enigines had to be a little bit higher than the nose until they were about to enter the building. In order for them to have plowed a track in the grass, the nose would have to have been higher than the apparent height of the fuselage impact. Is that simple enough for a mind no more complex than that of a prosimian to grasp?

[twinstead]

Your conspiracy theorist training is going well, roundhead. You've got the tactics almost down to a tee. Soon you'll be debating endlessly on internet forums along with your intrepid truther comrades without ever being able to get the attention of--or keep from getting laughed at--by anybody who can actually DO something about it.

Oh. Wait. You're already doing that. Happy graduation.

[twinstead]

Truthers: Raising argument from incredulity to new heights since 2001.

[Egil]

"NOC?" WTF?

A Twoofer claim is the witness were agents, non-official cover, who were in on it or told their story.

[Dave Rogers]

A Twoofer claim is the witness were agents, non-official cover, who were in on it or told their story.

No, no, no. "NOC" is an abbreviation for "North Of Citgo". When the NTSB produced their initial animation of the Flight 77 crash, a botched compass deviation correction resulted in it showing 77 flying north of the Citgo filling station near the Pentagon, when its actual course took it to the south (shut up Roundhead, this post isn't about you!). The Citizens' Investigation Team went to Washington some years later, when the memories of the witnesses were nicely blurred by the passage of time, then tried to argue them into believing that they'd seen the plane pass to the north, not the south, of the Citgo station, because a northern approach is inconsistent with the damage to the Pentagon. They then dreamed up a convoluted and obscure line of argument by which (they claimed) a witness could be absolutely 100% certain which side of a particular landmark the plane flew, but might possibly not have noticed the fact that it didn't then hit the Pentagon. "NOC" has since become a mantra of the Pentagon no-planers, which they chant repeatedly whenever they need to refresh their religious faith in an imaginary series of events.

Dave

[Egil]

No, no, no. "NOC" is an abbreviation for "North Of Citgo".

Dave

Ah, so they went from claiming the witnesses were in on it to the witnesses were right and thus inconsistent with Pentagon damage.

[Dave Rogers]

Ah, so they went from claiming the witnesses were in on it to the witnesses were right and thus inconsistent with Pentagon damage.

Yes, but right in a very limited sense. Anyone who claimed that the plane flew north of the Citgo then crashed into the Pentagon was right about the former but mistaken about the latter. Anyone who claimed that the plane flew south of the Citgo and crashed into the Pentagon was mistaken about both. And anyone who saw the plane fly over the Pentagon... well, they're still looking. There is, of course, a great deal of retrospective justification involved. Anyone who claims to have seen anything that disagrees with the CIT's preferred version of events has their testimony dissected in great detail, in a desperate attempt to discredit their account. Anyone who claims to have seen a NOC flightpath has that part of their testimony accepted as gospel, even if it disagrees with other NOC flightpaths. It's even been argued that the SOC testimonies can be discarded because the NOC flightpath is proven by the NOC testimonies therefore all others must be lies. In short, the CIT has extracted as much mileage as it's possible to extract from the special pleading fallacy.

Dave

[16.5]

By the way, after all of us went to some trouble to answer Roundhead's question, did he even acknowledge it or make any point even remotely related to his OP afterwards?

NO? Of course not.

Typical No Planers spamming the forum.

Chalk it up to another spectacular fail, Roundhead, you kooky No Planer you.

[DGM]

By the way, after all of us went to some trouble to answer Roundhead's question, did he even acknowledge it or make any point even remotely related to his OP afterwards?

NO? Of course not.

Typical No Planers spamming the forum.

Chalk it up to another spectacular fail, Roundhead, you kooky No Planer you.
You hit the nail on the head (indirectly). "truthers" now are only looking to get in to a "peeing contest".

I find now that if I don't want to draw mod action (that I so far have avoided) that they want us to get into is to read our post out-loud before hitting the submit button. This is a game to them.

[twinstead]

This is a game to them.

It always has been. We obviously represent The Mantm, and even when we are right, we are still The Mantm therefore NOT right. The game is to pwn The Mantm, or at least make your cute little peers believe you did.

Or something like that.

[Egil]

Or something like that.

Well, the Twoofer Movement did what the Movement was designed to do from the beginning which is to poison the well concerning 9/11.

What percent of the population belives the government had a hand in the acts or let it happen? If I remember it is over 50%

I am not much for Conspiracy Theory wanking but I believe the 9/11 Truth movement is a conspiracy theory to discredit, coverup, malign, doubt and sow discord.

[DGM]

Well, the Twoofer Movement did what the Movement was designed to do from the beginning which is to poison the well concerning 9/11.

What percent of the population believes the government had a hand in the acts or let it happen? If I remember it is over 50%
I am not much for Conspiracy Theory wanking but I believe the 9/11 Truth movement is a conspiracy theory to discredit, coverup, malign, doubt and sow discord.

I'm not so sure that's accurate. I think the highest numbers came from the most vague surveys. I think the actual would be <10%.

[jaydeehess]

I'm not so sure that's accurate. I think the highest numbers came from the most vague surveys. I think the actual would be <10%.

IIRC the highest numbers are for questions such as
"Do you agree that the government is with holding information pertaining to 9/11/01?"

This leaves open the senarios for; air quality at GZ in Manhattan being down played, for special fire codes in the PANYNJ buildings contributing to the collapses, for down playing of the seriousness afforded information about AlQada's intentions, by the US administration prior to Sept /01, etc.,. None of which backs up a MIHOP or LIHOP contention but which is portaryed by the TM as doing so.

[Dave Rogers]

This leaves open the senarios for; air quality at GZ in Manhattan being down played, for special fire codes in the PANYNJ buildings contributing to the collapses, for down playing of the seriousness afforded information about AlQada's intentions, by the US administration prior to Sept /01, etc.,. None of which backs up a MIHOP or LIHOP contention but which is portaryed by the TM as doing so.

It also allows for the possibility that the Government collected intelligence on al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks which it has not yet released to the general public, which doesn't even necessarily imply wrongdoing or even incompetence. Given that that's very likely the case, I wouldn't be surprised if this category scored 100%. It's vague enough for the statistic to be meaningless.

Dave

[Grizzly Bear]

Halucinate much? They had utility knives with steel blades, the same type that is the weapon of choice and a major cause of death among the Neds of glasgow, the murder capital of Europe. Your lack of militaryt training is showing through loud and clear. The crew had no idea at the time of the hijacking why they were being hijacked, That was Flt 93 Get you history straight before you get caught with your knickers to your knees again.



Yeah, right. you are a better fighter than a trained guerilla who has the advantage of surprise over you. Have at it, Rambo.


I don't think these people have ever heard of D. B. Cooper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._B._Cooper). Otherwise they wouldn't be so adamant about ignorant claims that "all they had were box cutters... what's the big deal?" What if all they have is a bluff and as a passenger there's no way to tell? As I recall they [the hijackers] threatened to have bombs on-board as well.

[twinstead]

One would think they could have used plastic knives if the passengers thought they had bombs.

[BenBurch]

The Space Shuttle Columbia is a good example.

Hmmm.... Were there CTs about this one?

[Egil]

Hmmm.... Were there CTs about this one?

They tried to claim a ground based laser, a ground launched kill-vehicle, a space based laser, bomb on board and other stuff.

Then NASA did their tests and the CTs were sunk more thoroughly than 9/11 Truthers.

[Reheat]

Halucinate much? They had utility knives with steel blades, the same type that is the weapon of choice and a major cause of death among the Neds of glasgow, the murder capital of Europe. Your lack of militaryt training is showing through loud and clear. The crew had no idea at the time of the hijacking why they were being hijacked, That was Flt 93 Get you history straight before you get caught with your knickers to your knees again.

Actually, according to the purchase records presented at the Moussaoui trial the perps had purchased Leatherman type tools just prior to 9/11. In that case calling them box cutters or even utility knives was likely wrong. The investigators also found several of these type of knives at the UA93 crash site....

[Egil]

Actually, according to the purchase records presented at the Moussaoui trial the perps had purchased Leatherman type tools just prior to 9/11.

And as you can see, not a box cutter, see the blade?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ef/Leatherman.jpg

[AJM8125]

Hmmm.... Were there CTs about this one?

There was some woo about the Israeli aboard destroying the shuttle so the debris would land in Palestine, TX to make it look like radical islamics were responsible. In short, yes, the Jews did it.

[twinstead]

I suspect that if anything bad ever happens in the world, and the Jews aren't actually involved, the Mossad gets a pay cut for that month. Quite the incentive to keep the evil plots going.

[HeyLeroy]

roundhead:

How do you reconcile the story of Steve Anderson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Gary Bauer with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mickey Bell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Richard Benedetto with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Brian Birdwell with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald R. Bouchoux with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Bright with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lisa Burgess with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Wayne T. Day with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Captain Michael Defina with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Michael DiPaula with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Penny Elgas with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Walker Lee Evey with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Ken Ford with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kat Gaines with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Afework Hagos with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Joe Harrington with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Albert Hemphill with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jerry Henson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Will Jarvis with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Terrance Kean with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mark Steven Kirk with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lincoln Liebner with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of David Marra with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Stephen McGraw with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Kirk Milburn with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Vin Narayanan with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Mary Ann Owens with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Steve Patterson with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Daniel C. Pfeilstucker Jr. with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Frank Probst with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Lon Rains with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of James S. Robbins with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Arthur Rosati with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Rob Schickler with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Noel Sepulveda with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jack Singleton with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Jim Sutherland with CIT's version of events?
How do you reconcile the story of Donald Timmerman with CIT's version of events?

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4532194&postcount=89
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=2814163&postcount=348

Hey, 1337m4n, I'm guessing he can't.

roundhead: prove them wrong.

[jaydeehess]

It also allows for the possibility that the Government collected intelligence on al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks which it has not yet released to the general public, which doesn't even necessarily imply wrongdoing or even incompetence. Given that that's very likely the case, I wouldn't be surprised if this category scored 100%. It's vague enough for the statistic to be meaningless.

Dave

Agreed, it ranks up there with "Do you like pie?"

[MIKILLINI]

At impact with the Pentagon.

The official narrative seems to be that the plane hit the building on a flat trajectory on the first floor, correct.

I just would like some of the experts on here who are familiar with the plane, to show how high the nose of the plane is compared to the bottom of the engines.And to impact as low on the building as it did, how that compares to the "height" of the plane from nose to bottom of engines

TIA

7 years and counting: Yet, here you are still, believing no airliner crashed into the Pentagon. Still rehashing over the same old arguments that have been debunked, but yet, you haven't heard a thing about any of the flight 77 passengers whereabouts?
Wake up!!