http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=51
1. “It was very, very low -- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down.”[387]
Mark Bright. Pentagon police officer who was at the guard shack. Does NOT claim to have witnessed the impact OR the plane hitting the poles. Mentioning the downed poles is not the same as seeing the plane hit them.
QUOTE
2. “He said the craft clipped a utility pole guide wire.”[388]
Utility pole guide wire? He does not claim to have seen the plane hit any light poles and no "guide wire" was hit. In fact he is not even quoted about this but he IS quoted seeing the plane "bank" which contradicts the official flight path and SUPPORTS the north side flight path. Arabesque is 0 for 2.
QUOTE
3. “Penny Elgas stopped as she saw a passenger jet descend, clip a light pole near her.”[389]
Penny also does not claim to have seen the plane hit the poles. Arabasque is not quoting Penny. Why is he deceptively attributing this quote to Penny in his analysis? He is 0 for 3.
QUOTE
4. “The plane approached the Pentagon… clipping a light pole, a car antenna… It clipped a couple of light poles on the way in.”[390]
Lee Evey was the Pentagon renovation manager. He was not a witness to the plane, the attack, or the light poles. He was at home at the time of the attack. This is EXACTLY why Arabesque's "research" is so damaging. He does ZERO fact checking and simply copies and pastes words provided for him by the complicit mainstream media. We have pointed this fact out to him in this thread and he even acknowledged it and promised to correct his mistakes in this post over 4 months ago! That means he is knowingly pushing disinfo which is an assault on truth and a slap in the face to real researchers.
QUOTE
5. “Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts.”[391]
Don Fortunato. Nobody denies the cab and pole were on the road. Don does not claim he saw the plane hit the pole, the pole sticking out of the windshield of the cab OR the cab driver removing the pole. BECAUSE HE WAS IN THE ARLINGTON COUNTY POLICE DEPT HQ. He was not even a witness. He is 0 for 5 and being deceptive again.
QUOTE
6. “[she saw] a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles.”[392]
Kat Gaines was on 110 and would not be able to physically see the plane hit the poles. Once again Arabesque is not quoting Kat Gaines. Without a direct quote AND confirmation of that quote he is not citing evidence but citing mainstream media deceptions. Besides....no "telephone poles" were downed at all. He is 0 for 6.
QUOTE
7. “It hit some lampposts on the way in.”[393]
Afework Hagos is not claiming to have SEEN the light poles get hit. We can't find a trace of this person existing at all but regardless.....simply mentioning the poles is NOT evidence that they literally saw the plane hit the poles. We know that a lot of people saw the poles on the ground and deduced that they were hit. He is 0 for 7.
QUOTE
8. “[the [plane flew] over Ft Myer picking off trees and light poles near the helicopter pad next to building.”[394]
Like Lee Evey, Tom Hovis is not a witness, he was in his office...8 miles away from the Pentagon. He was not present during the attack. He was reciting what he believed he learned about the flight path of the plane. Once again Arabesque has proven how inaccurate the disinformation is that he is publishing online.
QUOTE
9. “[he watched the plane clip] the antenna of the vehicle immediately behind him. It also struck three light poles between him and the building.”[395]
Don Mason was a Pentagon Renovation worker that is one of 3 PenRen workers cited in the ASCE report. Because of this he is a VERY suspect witness but once again.....he is not even quoting Don Mason. And even still...the mainstream media reporter Arabesque is quoting STILL doesn't say that he "saw" the plane hit the poles. He is 0 for 9.
QUOTE
10. “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.”[396]
Arabesque KNOWS that we did an interview with opus dei influenced priest Stephen McGraw. He KNOWS that we have posted this entire interview online for the entire world to see. He KNOWS that McGraw specifically told us and the world that he did NOT see the plane hit the poles despite the fact that he was allegedly right in front of them. Therefore Arabesque is once again caught deliberately disseminating disinformation in support of the official story. How can he do something so malicious and harmful to truth?
QUOTE
11. “I saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles.”[397]
Do I even have to address this? Kirk Milburn was not in a position to see the poles and he does not even claim to have seen them. We spoke with his son who told us that Kirk died in a motorcycle accident a couple years ago.
QUOTE
12. “As the aircraft approached the Pentagon, I saw a minor flash (later found out that the aircraft had sheared off a portion of a highway light pole down on Hwy 110.”[398]
Terry Morin was at the Navy Annex parking lot where you CAN NOT see route 27 or the light poles. You can't even see the Pentagon due to the steep decline. He does not even claim to have seen the light pole get hit. Arabesque is 0 for 12.
QUOTE
13. “The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me.”[399]
Vin was one of the reporters in the USA Today Parade. No "overhanging exit sign" was hit and he does not claim to see the plane hit any poles.
QUOTE
14. “Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass.”[400]
Mary Ann Ownes is also part of the USA Today/Gannett Parade. She is not claiming to have "seen" the poles get hit by the plane. He is 0 for 14.
QUOTE
15. “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.”
Where is his source for this one? Who said this? Whoever it was it sure wasn't a witness because they are talking about it in 3rd person. This is not a witness account at all. He is 0 for 15.
QUOTE
16. “I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant.”[401]
Here is the one account. Wanda Ramey. She is the ONE known witness who is directly quoted as having "seen" the plane hit the poles. She is or was a Pentagon police officer just like Chad Brooks. Chad had also said in the past that he saw the plane hit the poles. When we interviewed him he clarified and said that he didn't actually see it happen but simply saw the poles on the ground after the fact. No doubt Wanda is also deducing this and simply honestly embellishing her account just like Chad did. Since she is the ONLY one to specifically make this claim and since we have directly spoken with so many others who specifically say that they didn't see the poles get hit it is a fair assumption on our part to make. We are still trying to get a hold of her for direct clarification. Nonetheless she is the only one. He is 1 for 16.
QUOTE
17. “It knocked over a few light poles in its way…”[402]
Steve Riskus does not claim to have seen the plane hit the poles.
QUOTE
18. “[It] struck a light pole…The plane tried to recover, but hit a second light pole and continued flying at an angle.”[403]
Noel Sepulveda may sound like he saw the plane hit the poles; but he does NOT specifically state it and he may be relaying what he was told. This is why first-hand confirmation is so important. Plus it allegedly hit 5 poles not 2. Is it really possible for the plane to "try to recover" at over 500mph? If any of the 5 poles really affected the flight of the plane that would have been devastating and there is no way it would have hit with such perfect precision so low and level and fast to the ground as depicted in the security video. There is a lot of reason to doubt the legitimacy of this account and we were not able to find him for verification.
QUOTE
19. “There were light poles down.”[404]
Once again, Joel Sucherman DOES NOT claim to have seen the poles get hit, is a USA Today Editor, AND we interviewed him in his office at Gannett. He specifically told us that he did not see the plane hit the poles. That is the type of effort it takes to find the truth. Why does Arabasque refuse to confirm his research and insist on spreading information that has been PROVEN to be incorrect even though he is fully aware of it? How can he not see how harmful that is?
QUOTE
20. “It turned and came around in front of the vehicle and it clipped one of these light poles…”[405]
Once again....does not claim to have seen the poles hit. We had dinner at Mike Walter's house. He also specifically told us that he did NOT see the plane hit the poles.
QUOTE
21. “The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, knocking over light poles.”[406]
Rodney Washington is not claiming that he saw the plane hit the poles. You can not take an unconfirmed statement out of context and assume he is saying what you want him to say. He is simply relaying what he believes the plane to have done.
QUOTE
22. “I saw it clip a light pole.”[407]
Uh-huh. Here is the "Unnamed Navy admiral". Real detailed account isn't it? That is not a witness with a name and so this is not valid evidence.
So......just as I stated; there is only ONE witness who states she saw the plane hit a pole.
Out of all these, many have ADMITTED they didn't see the plane hit the poles and many aren't even witnesses to the event at all and only 1 claims she saw the plane hit a pole. It's clear this is NOT evidence strong enough to counter the rock solid north of the citgo testimony that is independently corroborated 6 times and directly refuted by NOBODY proving the plane did not hit the poles.
First-hand confirmation of ALL witness accounts is key.
Never trust the mainstream media but PARTICULARLY in regards to 9/11.
