8 out of 8 at Citgo station

[mudlark]

@ Mudlark. Care to reply to post # 293?

There ya go. Patience.

 

[twinstead]

so did I miss when you provided your mathematical proof that the flight wasn't impossible, mudlark?

 

[jhunter1163]

The good Rev. Ticknor says:

But the most interesting was a 9-11 conspiracy theory site that quoted me as an eyewitness to the attack on the Pentagon. Comments, attributed to me, but printed without my knowledge or permission were used to support the notion that it may not have been a plane that struck the Pentagon, but rather a missile. The web page says, "This is the only witness statement that seems to have caught the white smoke which would agree with a missile being fired. Henry Ticknor, intern minister at the Unitarian Universalist Church of Arlington, Virginia was driving to church that Tuesday morning when American Airlines flight 77 came in fast and low over his car and struck the Pentagon. "There was a puff of white smoke and then a billowing black cloud."

Where did that come from? No idea, unless it was lifted from a UU World Magazine article for which I was interviewed at some length as an eyewitness.

Mudlark says:

Tells of media LYING about what he said.

Which media is lying, Mudlark?

 

[mudlark]

If you aren't going to do the math and prove the flight path from CIT is even possible, could you at least post a plausible theory for what happened to American Airlines flight 77 at the Pentagon on 9/11/01?

I mean really, if you don't have a theory or hypothesis, why don't you just cut and paste a plausible explanation from whatever site you got all of this other stuff from?

I won´t be derailed this time carlito.
Talk about the witness testimony that this thread is about.
What´s wrong? Afraid you might have to actually read some of the links offered here as counterevidence?

 

[twinstead]

These witnesses are being linked to in order to discredit NOC testimony or to be labelled so-called impact witnesses.
He was 5 MILES away. How can his testimony which was obviously manipulated, be compared to people within metres of the plane?

His testimony is like many others mentioned. Making up the numbers. Unconfirmed and doesn´t contradict NOC.

Yea. And because YOU say it, it must be true, right? The vast preponderance of evidence, both physical and eye witness, support the fact that an airliner crashed into the Pentagon. You disagree? Tough. Even fellow truthers think your theory is idiotic.

 

[twinstead]

I won´t be derailed this time carlito.
Talk about the witness testimony that this thread is about.
What´s wrong? Afraid you might have to actually read some of the links offered here as counterevidence?

No more afraid than you to actually read some of the links offered here as "counterevidence" to you.

 

[mudlark]

The good Rev. Ticknor says:



Mudlark says:



Which media is lying, Mudlark?

Take your pick. Manipulation. Embellishment. Call it what you want. Here are a few more examples.

Other witnesses have publically retracted aspects of their testimony either through secondary interviews by CIT, through disinfo/manipulation and/or that person´s indignation at the media:

Stephen McGraw:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5085491450059007792&hl=en

McGraw´s original testimony on witnessing lightpoles being struck and the cab story were shown for what they were in a CIT interview with him. A falsehood/manipulation on words.

Penny Elgas

http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/pe_060509.mp3

HILL: ¨And you said you saw it... you saw it hit one of the light poles?¨

ELGAS: ¨ No, I didn't see it hit. I heard on the news that it hit a light pole

On how she came across the Smithsonian debris

HILL: ¨And that kinda... the... what I was reading it fell into your car?¨

ELGAS: ¨Well, that's what THEY said, but that's not what happened.¨

HILL: ¨You just picked it up, or?¨

ELGAS: ¨ I Picked it up¨.

Campos, Omar

His only testimony is in this live video clip

Campos interview.

The guy who translated for the interviewer changed the context and content of what he said and saw.

“sabes que yo estaba trabjando en el edificio que tenemos aqui al costado"

I was working in the building that we have over here to the side.

When asked what he saw Campos said the plane came in over him low, so low it moved the trees..

“yo lo via que me pasaba aqui por encima, tu sabes que venia muy bajo y movia hasta los arboles, hasta segun venia tan de bajo”.

He repeats the fact that it was low twice. The translator, on the other hand, changed that to say it came in “very fast down it moved then go straight to the building”. He didn’t even mention it was low, which is what Campos emphasized. Campos didn’t say anything about the speed of the plane, and DID NOT say it “moved straight to the building”. The translator made that up.

Also related to the color of the plane, Gordon Peterson (the interviewer) mentioned American Airlines (nothing leading there) and Rajish passed that on in his question to Omar. Campos ignored them and responded that it was like one of the planes here from United ("algo asi como los de la United"), which was translated as "a United States Plane" by the translator. Omar was clearly talking about United Airlines, not "United States Plane". Omar wasn’t mixing English and Spanish like the “translator”. Had he meant a “United States Plane” he would have used “de los estados unidos” or “estado unidinese”. In effect Omar was confirming Sgt Brooke’s perception of the plane as being one from United Airlines.

So where in this picture is a building ´to the side of the Pentagon´ and trees? It certainly ISN¨T on the south path.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/buckwheat_bucket/AllGroupsMap.jpg

So he isn´t an impact witness or an ´AA´ witness according to this testimony.

But hey, the totally off translation suited so...


Cissell James R.

´Saw wheel go past car. Saw faces in plane.´

This witness was quoted as saying this on the page I was linked to..after YEARS of his public denial of saying any such thing.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2...606flight77.htm

"The Cincinnati Post article, which you refer, angered me greatly after reading it. It is almost completely fiction based loosely on an interview I did with a Cincinnati Post reporter Kimball Perry who called me in response to an on air phone report that I did for Channel 12 in Cincinnati.
The reporter took extreme creative license not only with the title but also with the story as a whole. Why he felt the need to sensationalize anything that happened on September 11 is beyond me. My words to the reporter were, "I was about four cars back from where the plane crossed over the highway. That it happened so quickly I DIDN'T EVEN SEE WHAT AIRLINE IT WAS FROM. However, I was so close to the plane when it went past that had it been sitting on a runway, I could have seen the faces of passengers peering out."

He goes on to say in the same interview clarifying what he saw:

"Looking at the trajectories in the diagrams they have online seems off to me. I remember the plane coming in more directly at the side of the building than at an angle," said Cissell

Totally contradicting SOC.

Andrea Kaiser

Arlington County Fire Department Fire Truck 101

"As I was driving down 95 heading towards the Pentagon, one of my members, teammates, said, 'What is that plane doing?' And by the time I looked up, the plane was moving so fast all I saw was an explosion."

Here is what Captain Steve McCoy in the same firetruck (101) had said:

¨When Captain Steve McCoy of ENGINE 101 REPORTED A PLANE GOING DOWN IN THE VICINITY OF THE 14TH STREET BRIDGE, all the response units in the county immediately began gearing up¨
http://www.fireengineering.com/display_article/165238/25/none/none/Feat/THE-PENTAGON-ATTACK-ON-9-11:-ARLINGTON-COUNTY-(VA)-FIRE-DEPARTMENT-RESPONS

Fire engine 101 has been repeatedly quoted as having seen an ´impact´ or disguising the words to make it appear so.
Hope this finally clears this up.

Kenneth McClellan

Pentagon spokesman (not even a witness)

" The C-130 pilot "followed the aircraft and reported it was heading into the Pentagon," he said. "He saw it crash into the building. He saw the fireball." ...

This is false according to Lt. Col Steve O´Brien:

"I distinctly remember having a difficult time keeping the AA flight in sight after we turned back to the east to follow it per a request from Wash. Departure Control. When I saw the initial explosion I was not able to see exactly where or what it had impacted, but remember trying to approximate a position to give to ATC. It was then that I was able to see the sun reflecting off the Potomac and the runway at Wash. Nat'l and thought to myself that the AA flight must have had some sort of IFE and was trying to make it back to National Airport."

Darb Ryan
Vice Admiral

in his office at the Navy Annex

¨ Having learned that New York had been attacked, he was on the telephone recommending the evacuation of the Pentagon "when out of the corner of my eye I saw the airplane" a split second before it struck.¨

´a split second before it struck´ is added in by the reporter for ´Aviation Week´ and are not his actual words.
So all we have is him stating that he saw the plane.

Stephens Levi

Stars & Stripes September 12, 2001

Levi Stephens, 23, a courier for the Armed Forces Information Service, spoke of the crash:

...It flew over the van and I looked back and I saw this huge explosion, black smoke everywhere."

CIT phoned and e-mailed this witness and revealed that the plane did NOT fly over his van and that he was ´misquoted´.

Alan Wallace

http://web.telia.com/~u43109230/flight77/texts/Wallace.txt

“SO MANY PEOPLE THINK MARK AND I WATCHED THE PLANE HIT THE BUILDING ...WE DID NOT. WE ONLY SAW IT APPROACH FOR AN INSTANT..¨

Did not see ´impact´

Dave Winslow

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

Okay, another dumbass, debunked testimony in the sense that his words have been taken WAY out of context, knowingly and repeatedly served up as the truth and STILL linked to.

¨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

Turns into this:

AP reporter Dave Winslow also saw the crash. He said, "I saw the tail of a large airliner ... It ploughed right into the Pentagon."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/1...eronmensfashion

Which turns into this:

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

Disinfo.

Then there is witness embellishment/deduction translated into fact:

Chadwick Brooks

NOC witness along with Lagasse. Exactly corraborated eachothers flightpath and placement of the plane on North of Citgo.
During his CIT interview he ADMITTED that he did NOT see the lightpoles being struck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKov_UZDQE

There ARE other ´witnesses´ that continue to be used in other ´impact witness´ lists. Lee Evey, who wasn´t even there, Tom Hovis who was EIGHT MILES away in his office and Mickey Bell who had been quoted as describing the entire Official Path, lightpoles and all. It was eventually settled upon that he had no idea what happened.

That enough to start with?
I would personally be very interested in CIT interviews with ALL witnesses and see what else crops up.

 

[BCR]

I won´t be derailed this time carlito.
Talk about the witness testimony that this thread is about.
What´s wrong? Afraid you might have to actually read some of the links offered here as counterevidence?

Now who was it said earlier that the eyewitnesses have to be considered in light of what is possible? The math and physics of what the witnesses describe determine what is and is not possible.

It is you who posted an animation that has a plane passing above and behind Morin. Morin never described that. Quite the contrary, he was walking out from between the wings facing south and would not see something behind him to the north.

The math and physics is the difference between the tooth fairy and an actual plane being discussed. So far, you have been talking tooth fairy.

 

[twinstead]

I would personally be very interested in CIT interviews with ALL witnesses and see what else crops up.

That's the LAST thing you want. ALL witness accounts point to one thing: The flippin' plane impacted the Pentagon. You are afraid of that simple truth.

 

[The Big Dog]

Take your pick. Manipulation. Embellishment. Call it what you want.
I would personally be very interested in CIT interviews with ALL witnesses and see what else crops up.

Dude, no need to cut and paste right from the mutts any longer.

there is no one here who believes in you more than me.

Now you know that the flight path can be calculated (although you appear to have missed that the dip ***** calculated the bank with a wide gentle slope while perfectly level and separately calculated the descent/pull up with out the bank, duh)

So do it, my friend, make history!

 

[mudlark]

Sorry, but we do HAVE SOC witnesses. If you bothered to read their testimony and claims, they put the plane SOC.

Unfortunately for you, NOT everyone who was there that day was going to use the CITGO station as a point of reference. Many were using the light poles, and their position why they were on the freeway or from where they were standing.

You are a no planer, and people like you are disgusting to the core. YOU should be ignored for repeating such despicable claims.

Who are they?
Lightpoles? Who?

 

[The Big Dog]

Who are they?
Lightpoles? Who?

Say, while you are running the numbers, are you working on explaining why Aldo called Frank Probst a huge liar?

kthxbye

 

[mudlark]

Dude, no need to cut and paste right from the mutts any longer.

there is no one here who believes in you more than me.

Now you know that the flight path can be calculated (although you appear to have missed that the dip ***** calculated the bank with a wide gentle slope while perfectly level and separately calculated the descent/pull up with out the bank, duh)

So do it, my friend, make history!

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1248677650819981509

Watch the video.

Read the tech paper here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=122

Any questions about it ask them.

Edit: Wrong address

 

[mudlark]

That's the LAST thing you want. ALL witness accounts point to one thing: The flippin' plane impacted the Pentagon. You are afraid of that simple truth.

ALL?
Have you read the witnesses I´ve covered already?
Lie.

 

[A W Smith]

Originally Posted by twinstead That's the LAST thing you want. ALL witness accounts point to one thing: The flippin' plane impacted the Pentagon. You are afraid of that simple truth.

ALL?
Have you read the witnesses I´ve covered already?
Lie.

Where do all your yellow lines end ?? http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/buckwheat_bucket/AllGroupsMap.jpg

 

[mudlark]

Say, while you are running the numbers, are you working on explaining why Aldo called Frank Probst a huge liar?

kthxbye

Oh yeah, Frank Probst,

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=841

Frank Probst, an information management specialist for the Pentagon Renovation Program, left his office trailer near the Pentagon's south parking lot at 9:36 a.m. Sept. 11. Walking north beside Route 27, the 6'2" Vietnam Veteran looked up, directly into the right engine of a 757 commercial airliner cresting the hilltop Navy Annex. It reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its right engine.
"Had I not hit the deck, the plane would have taken off my head."
http://www.troa.org/Magazine/January2002/feature3.asp

As he approached the heliport he noticed a plane flying low over the Annex and heading right for him. According to the Arlington County after-action report (Arlington County, 2002), this occurred at 9:38 a.m. The aircraft pulled up, seemingly aiming for the first floor of the building, and leveled off. Probst hit the ground and observed the right wing tip pass through the portable 750 kW generator that provides backup power to Wedge 1.The right engine took out the chainlink fence and posts surrounding the generator. The left engine struck an external steam vault before the fuselage entered the
building. As the fireball from the crash moved toward him, Probst
ran toward the South Parking Lot and recalls falling down twice.
Fine pieces of wing debris floated down about him.
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf

First of all, the ASCE report:

¨As he approached the heliport he noticed a plane flying low over the Annex and heading right for him.¨

Another Navy Annex witness.
Frank Probst places himself BEYOND the official path´s entry onto the lawn. This is further cemented by his quote on the plane nearly striking him:

¨looked up, directly into the RIGHT engine of a 757 commercial airliner cresting the hilltop Navy Annex. It reached him so fast and flew so low that Probst dropped to the ground, fearing he'd lose his head to its RIGHT engine.¨

This narrows the ASCE´s report on his position to a specific point.

Yet the previous report claimed that he was ¨Walking north beside Route 27¨ on the lawn path that runs parallel to the road in front of the Pentagon and the ASCE report claims he was ´approaching the heliport´.

These two statements don´t add up. He cannot be in the official path AND walking North, close to the heliport. He SHOULD be 100-150m further on to hold these words true.

The ASCE has him as the main witness upholding the path (which has been shown NOT to be true) and of the official damage.If you read the above report again you will see that he is NOT directly quoted AFTER they claim that he observed the wing tip strike the generator trailer. The rest has been inserted to make it APPEAR that he witnessed this.
According to the ever-revised official reports on the damage analysis
the ENGINE is what was supposed to have done this damage. NOT the wing tip.

Frank Probst claimed that the right engine of the plane just missed him and he had to dive out of its way.

This places the plane even MORE towards NOC.

His description of the fine debris falling around him is interesting as the total debris field is to the NORTH of the alleged impact point. Towards the heliport.

A Navy Annex witness whose original testimony places the plane´s entrance onto Route 27 WELL AWAY from the lightpoles.

 

[mudlark]

Where do all your yellow lines end ??[qimg]http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/buckwheat_bucket/AllGroupsMap.jpg[/qimg]

NOC. Funny how the damage allegedly caused by the plane happened from these trajectories huh?

 

[The Big Dog]

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-1248677650819981509

Watch the video.

Read the tech paper here:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=122

Any questions about it ask them.

Edit: Wrong address

Saw it, read it, already pointed out that they were garbage.

You said earlier that you did your own research, so get to it. At this point the flight path is PROVEN!

Now just show it was POSSIBLE

 

[mudlark]

No more afraid than you to actually read some of the links offered here as "counterevidence" to you.

Man you talk a lot but you don´t actually say anything.
I´m currently dissecting one of the links offered and you have offered no counterargument.
Where are the ´hundreds of impact witnesses´?
The SOC witnesses?

 

[The Big Dog]

A huge bunch of craziness snipped.

What the fark are you on, dude?

What is with all the cherry picking?

Frank Probst, south side witness, and all that craziness just goes to show, what, ALDO THINKS HE LIED ?

Well, well, I guess we need your math more than ever!

DO THE MATH YOURSELF CIT FAN!