[Moderated]Gravy's witness "summary" does not reflect reality.

[Lyte Trip]

It's merely a cut and paste blog job, not research.

How many of the witnesses that he refers to has he contacted to confirm their accounts and how many has he even bothered to analyze in detail or to plot their actual location/point of view?

I personally challenge Gravy to separately list each account of the 105 witnesses that he alleges "saw the plane hit the Pentagon."

List them one by one each with their own dedicated post.

They deserve at least that much don't they?

Gravy has given them way less respect by not even listing their names!

This is because he is deceptively disingenuous and completely wrong.

I will agree that there are way MORE than 105 that saw the plane but only a fraction of that even claim that they literally "saw" the impact and even less than that possibly could have.

Any honest researcher who has actually studied the Pentagon attack will agree that the building is at the bottom of a hill and the alleged impact point is difficult to see in detail from almost anywhere but route 27.

Well we have demonstrated how even the route 27 witnesses wouldn't have been able to see the alleged impact with much detail.

As far as the alleged 16 "light pole witnesses" go; none of their accounts have been confirmed as having actually seen the light poles get clipped and we have personally interviewed the most significant ones (McGraw, Sucherman, Walter, and Brooks) who ALL personally told us that they did NOT see the light poles get hit by the plane and merely deduced it after the fact.

This is particularly odd in the case of McGraw, Sucherman, and Walter who were all allegedly on route 27 with a PERFECT view of the poles but a not so perfect view of the alleged impact that they all suspiciously claim they saw in detail.

Here is the real life view of the confirmed position of Sucherman and Walter:


McGraw would have had the best view of the alleged impact but an even better view of poles 3, 4, and 5.

Here is his alleged real life view:





So how come he claims he didn't see the light poles get hit and how come not a single witness in the entire investigative body of evidence mentions the alleged smoke trail?

[Rahne Everson]

Oh, this should be fun.

[Brainache]

In what way are the over 100 witnesses Gravy's?

Did Gravy interview them and coach them through their five year old recollections?

Did Gravy cherry pick their statements to try to prove his point?

Does Gravy take a tiny minority of witnesses five years after the fact and reject all the others plus all the physical evidence?

Or is that what Lyte Trip does?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

And now, for something completely different; A man with a tape recorder up his nose.

[strathmeyer]

Huh? How do I make Gravy do things for me?

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by Brainache

In what way are the over 100 witnesses Gravy's?

I personally challenge Gravy to separately list each account of the 105 witnesses that he alleges "saw the plane hit the Pentagon."

What part of that statement do you not understand?

[WildCat]

How come no witness mentions a flyover?

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by strathmeyer

What just happened?

You were blindsided with the truth.

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by WildCat

How come no witness mentions a flyover?

They do.

But we will never know what the PURE witnesses and first reports indicate because the 911 calls were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered.

[ConspiRaider]

What is the power-to-weight ratio of an unladen flying Citgo station (sans coconuts)?

[WildCat]

Did the trees block the entire sky, and this is why no witness reported a flyover?

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

They do.

No, they don't.

[boloboffin]

Wow. McGraw looks like he was in the perfect position to see whether a huge AA jet flew over or hit the Pentagon.



Why don't people turn into robots that automatically record and remember everything that happens around them in horrific situations? If only we had a Pensieve, we could dig someone's memory out of their head, and see exactly what happened. However, Pensieves only exist in Harry Potter. Real witnesses miss things. They go back over their story and create false memories. They get things right. They get things wrong.

The final arbiter of the reliability of a witness statement is the physical evidence. It does not matter that McGraw doesn't remember seeing the plane hit the poles. It does not matter that Lagasse swears 100% that the plane was north of the Citgo.

Physical evidence trumps eyewitness testimony. The vast majority of eyewitness testimony is supported by the physical evidence here. Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

[Brainache]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

I personally challenge Gravy to separately list each account of the 105 witnesses that he alleges "saw the plane hit the Pentagon."

What part of that statement do you not understand?

The part where you think Gravy should do your research for you. If you were seriously researching all the Pentagon witnesses you would have done all of that before you made your silly video.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by ConspiRaider

What is the power-to-weight ratio of an unladen flying Citgo station (sans coconuts)?

With or without a mini-mart?

[pomeroo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

You were blindsided with the truth.

How's this for truth?--you are a fraud. You like making demands, so I demand that you take your bogus "evidence" to a real news outlet. Find someone who agrees that you've got something. You are sitting on the biggest story in the history of journalism if you're not the snake oil salesman I claim you are.

At long last, put up or shut up.

[ConspiRaider]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

They do.

But we will never know what the PURE witnesses and first reports indicate because the 911 calls were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered.

99 and 44/100ths pure? And do they float? Anything less and I shall spurn their testimony and go for a bench verdict.

[Trifikas]

Gravy-

After spending Several years in a D&D campaign, bringing a Paladin up through 26 levels, I had a few simple rules for playing him. The most important, and I say it here as advice to you:

Never let a scoundrel dictate the tenets of honor.

Trifikas.

[ConspiRaider]

Who's the padre in the picture? And is he Polish? No I was just asking because I saw Pole #3 and Pole #4 and Pole #5 and since I am part Polish I was looking for a family resemblance.

[ConspiRaider]

Originally Posted by Trifikas

Gravy-

After spending Several years in a D&D campaign, bringing a Paladin up through 26 levels, I had a few simple rules for playing him. The most important, and I say it here as advice to you:

Never let a scoundrel dictate the tenets of honor.

Trifikas.

I thought a Paladin was another word for an elevator operator. Shouldn't he have brought YOU up through 26 levels?

I had a Paladin who liked to let me off between floors 25 and 26 so I'd hafta jump down and risk my neck. You're right, I'd classify him as a scoundrel...

[Jonnyclueless]

Sorry Gravy, but in a city of millions of people, are we to believe there could possibly be people who could see the Pentagon? The only thing capable of seeing such a plane crash in such a populated place are the hundreds of cameras that are all pointed at the impact zone.

[ConspiRaider]

Originally Posted by WildCat

With or without a mini-mart?

With mini-mart, but before they deliver and stock the pallet of Tropicana Orange Juice (No Pulp) on the shelves. Few people realize that orange juice has mass, and weight. Common mistake in calculations such as these.

[A W Smith]

http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/6-2...on.cgi.98.html

Quote:

From: "Lagasse, William, , PFPA"
To: "'apfn@apfn.org '"


Dear Sir rest assured it was a Boeing 757 that flew into the building that
day, I was on duty as a pentagon police sgt. I was refueling my vehicle at
the barraks k gas station that day adjacent to the aircrafts flight path.
It was close enough that i could see the windows had the shades pulled down,
it struck several light poles next to rt 27 and struck a trailer used to
store construction equipment for the renovation of the pentagon that was to
the right of the fueselage impact point. The fact that you are insinuating
that this was staged and a fraud is unbelievable. You ask were the debris
is...well it was in the building..I saw it everywhere. I swear to god you
people piss me off to no end. I invite you and you come down and I will walk
you through it step by step. I have more than a few hours in general
aviation aircraft and can identify commercial airliners. Have you ever seen
photos of other aircraft accident photos...there usually isnt huge amounts
of debris left...how much did you see from the WTC?...are those fake
aircraft flying into the building. I know that this will make no diffrence
to you because to even have a websight like this you are obviously a
diffrent sort of thinker

Or this

Quote:

From: Lagasse, William, , PFPA
To: Dick Eastman

Mr. Eastman The barracks k gas station is were the press set up after the
attack, approx 500-600m west-south west of the pentagon. The aircraft
struck the poles in question, they were not blown down, the aircraft passed
almost directly over the naval annex splitting the distance between the ANC
and Columbia pike. and was approx 100-150ft agl when it passed over the
annex and continued on a shallow-fast decent and literally hit the building
were it met the ground. There was no steep bank, but a shallow bank with a
heavy uncoordinated left rudder turn causing a severe yaw into the building
with the starboard side of the cockpit actually hitting at about the same
time the wing was involved with the trailer, Because of the Doppler effect
no one could have heard the plane if they were on rt 27 until it was already
in the building, identifying its position and trajectory from that angle
would have been difficult if not impossible...it was not over Arlington
National Cemetery but closer to Columbia pike itself, there is a small grove
of trees that would have shielded anyone on 27 from seeing the aircraft
until it was literally on top of them...again not much time to make the
assessment. I identified it as American Airlines almost as soon as I saw
it and radioed that it had struck the building. I was on the Starboard side
of the aircraft. There was very little wake turbulence that I can recall,
which was surprising to me. The aircraft DID NOT have its landing gear or
flaps extended. whoever said the landing gear comes out when its that low
forgets the aircraft was exceeding the speed that would allow gear to be
extended. How and where the trailer was struck I cant speak of because rt 27
blocked my view slightly to the right because it is elevated. I did however
see it in person BEFORE any EMS/Fire arrived and it was fully engulfed in
flame 30-40 seconds after impact literally torn in half. you can see in a
few AP photos a tower workers 300zx on the left side of the impact point
that was struck adjacent to the fire truck that was hit. 3 fireman were
there at the tower as well as two persons in the tower that watched this
entire process and are luck to be alive. There was almost no debris to the
right/south of the impact point but I found a compressor blade and carbon
fiber pieces over 3/4 of a mile away to the north on 27 when we were
collecting evidence. The biggest piece of debris I saw was one of the
engines smashed...but intact in the building. I saw the building from the
inside and outside..before during and after the collapse and rest assured
that it was indeed an American airlines 757 that struck the Pentagon that
morning. no photos clearly show the size of the original breech...it was at
least 10-12 feet high and 20-30 feet wide not than size persons who weren't
there claim. I don't know what else I can say to convince you. I hope your
search for the truth will end with this e-mail as I have nothing to gain by
lying or distorting facts.. I live with what I saw everyday of my life, It
has taken a long time to deal with the images, screams and anger I felt
that day, to be honest your website angered me to the point I wanted to just
curse and rant and rave but I decided this would be much more helpful in
quelling misconceptions

or this

Quote:

William Lagasse
Re: Such as?
Wed Jun 25 17:18:28 2003
140.185.96.59

Ron, I am not an anonymous heckler. I am Police Sgt that saw the entire thing unfold in front of me. I know what I saw..I know what happened but obviously you feel your conspiracy theroy is much more feasable..were you there?

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by WildCat

Did the trees block the entire sky, and this is why no witness reported a flyover?

You will never know what they really reported because the 911 calls were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered.

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by A W Smith

quotes from Lyte trips "star witness", The Eastman Letters

How does any of that contradict the north side claim that is validated by all witnesses and directly refuted by none?

[ConspiRaider]

Recipe for peanut butter sandwich:

1. Acquire this number of slices of bread: Not 1. One is right off. 3 is too many. Acquire 2 slices, and the number of slices is 2.

2. Slather with liberal doses of peanut butter. If a Republican, slather with conservative doses.

3. Slather, eat, repeat.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

And now, for something completely different; A man with three buttocks.

[Jonnyclueless]

So how exactly does the plane hit the generator in front of the building, but then continue to fly over?

[Totovader]

Why is it that Lyte Trip runs away for months at a time, only to come back and make absurd statements, demand that people do what he says, and then refuse to answer any questions at all about his silly theory?

This seems to me to be the kind of delusion that does not go unnoticed by the individual: Lyte Trip has got to know he's a fraud.

[e^n]

I don't see the problem with these statistics, the spreadsheet and sources are provided? From a trivial examination it appears the people who saw the poles hit were:

Bright Mark
Brooks, Chadwick
Evey Walker Lee
Gaines Kat
Hagos Afework
Hovis Tom
Khavkin D. S.
Mason, Don
McGraw Stephen
Navy Admiral, unnamed
Owens Mary Ann
Ramey, Wanda
Sepulveda Noel
Washington, Rodney

[Qubit]

Are DVD sales lagging?

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by Trifikas

Gravy-

After spending Several years in a D&D campaign, bringing a Paladin up through 26 levels, I had a few simple rules for playing him. The most important, and I say it here as advice to you:

Never let a scoundrel dictate the tenets of honor.

Trifikas.

Don't worry.

If he doesn't use your nerd excuse he will simply state that we "crave attention" so he refuses to give it to us.

But it will be clear to the true critical thinkers that he is unwilling to back up his own claims with facts or evidence.

Gravy is serving you with garbage info and you people accept it like a catholic taking Eucharist.

[StoneWT]

Why not do the research yourself? You are making an issue of it.

[WildCat]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

You will never know what they really reported because the 911 calls were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered.

You cannot possibly be insinuating that people called 911 to report a flyover, the tapes were confiscated and the people who reported a flyover then shrugged and said "oh well, who cares"? Because that would be a an unbelievably foolish thing to think, wouldn't it?

[Jonnyclueless]

How does the plane hit the generator and then fly over top of the building?

How does the witness explain seeing the plane fly on the north side of the station, but hit light poles on the south side?

How does someone pll off a plane that is based on pure hope that no one happens to see it? did they roll some dice in deciding to go through with it?

[nicepants]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

It's merely a cut and paste blog job, not research.

Lyte - How many of the witnesses have you contacted?

[Myriad]

After an extensive examination of the evidence, I'm now convinced that an elaborate "illusion" was staged at the Pentagon on 9/11. The terrorists used misdirection to make it appear as if the plane flew north of the Citgo station, performed a physically impossible maneuver, and then overflew the Pentagon concealed by a pyrotechnic bomb. When actually, it crashed into the Pentagon and exploded. The plan was to prevent anyone from noticing the crash until the fire had spread irrevocably throughout the whole building.

But the attempted illusion didn't work very well. Almost no one was fooled.

The question is how this clever plan could have almost completely failed to fool anyone? I mean, we know how they goofed -- hitting the light poles, being seen by all those witnesses crashing into the building, etc. -- but why? Such a failure contradicts the findings of a careful study of novels, movies and television shows, which clearly demonstrates that that people who can do magic tricks, always get away with stuff. Watch The Illusionist. Watch any episode of the Bill Bixby TV series The Magician. Watch any Cruise-free episode of Mission Impossible. Stage magic, when applied to unplanned uncontrolled real-world problems and situations, never fails.

So then, how could the terrorists have failed to fool so many people (certain present company excepted) into believing the plane flew north of the Citgo and then flew over the Pentagon? I think the answer lies in the possibility that Arabs can't do stage magic the same way white guys can't break dance. Something happened between the time of Aladdin (who was Chinese anyhow) and today; the Arabs lost their stage magic mojo. Have you ever seen "The Great Achmed" or "The Amazing Omar" saw a woman in half live on stage? Okay, maybe you have, but have you ever seen him put her back together again? (Remember, without that part, it might not be magic!)

Just to double-check my research, I did a search on "The Amazing Omar" and found this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntX5HTehPfg. I rest my case.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Lyte Trip]

Originally Posted by e^n

I don't see the problem with these statistics, the spreadsheet and sources are provided? From a trivial examination it appears the people who saw the poles hit were:

Bright Mark
Brooks, Chadwick
Evey Walker Lee
Gaines Kat
Hagos Afework
Hovis Tom
Khavkin D. S.
Mason, Don
McGraw Stephen
Navy Admiral, unnamed
Owens Mary Ann
Ramey, Wanda
Sepulveda Noel
Washington, Rodney

Yes...."trivial examination" is correct!

You owe me responses at LC so I wonder why you would be so quick to post such a lame response to me here.

Of these alleged "witnesses" only the "unnamed Navy Admiral" and Wanda Ramey are reported as specifically saying that they literally "saw" the light poles get clipped.

The anonymous guy doesn't count so that leaves one.

Wanda Ramey's account remains unconfirmed despite our efforts to reach this supposed Pentagon Police officer.

The fact that you cite Lee Evey as a witness is laughable and completely indicative of the lack of research any of you do.

He was the Pentagon renovation manager and not a witness to the event at all!






DS Khavikin reports a "small commercial aircraft" and was located further back on Columbia Pike than Edward Paik!

She did not and could not physically see any light poles.

But never forget that Brooks, McGraw, Sucherman, and Walter ALL personally told us that they did NOT see the light poles get hit so you can cross them all off.

You people are not confirming these reports and therefore NOT doing any true research.

You are simply cutting and pasting lies.

[Trifikas]

Originally Posted by Lyte Trip

Don't worry.

If he doesn't use your nerd excuse he will simply state that we "crave attention" so he refuses to give it to us.

But it will be clear to the true critical thinkers that he is unwilling to back up his own claims with facts or evidence.

Gravy is serving you with garbage info and you people accept it like a catholic taking Eucharist.

Wel, if anyone was wondering why I mentioned My previous anecdote, there's your reason. Thank you & good night!

[ConspiRaider]

Originally Posted by WildCat

You cannot possibly be insinuating that people called 911 to report a flyover, the tapes were confiscated and the people who reported a flyover then shrugged and said "oh well, who cares"? Because that would be a an unbelievably foolish thing to think, wouldn't it?

Yep, very foolish.

By the way, how's the new bathroom holding up? No leaks? Are you already taking it for granted?