• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Flight 77 flight path

I´ve an idea.
Why don´t you go and ask the witnesses yourself?
Ask them if there was any important deleted footage that actually proves that what they MEANT to say wasn´t portrayed by the editting.
Is that what you´re saying?
I could also ask the ´what are they hiding´ question to the severe lack of documented evidence available from the scene, the withheld video tapes and sequestered 911 calls.
But I won´t. ;)

Are you going to address the posts above concerning eye witnesses and physical evidence that you should debunk, or just say silly stuff like this?
 
I´ve an idea.
Why don´t you go and ask the witnesses yourself?
Ask them if there was any important deleted footage that actually proves that what they MEANT to say wasn´t portrayed by the editting.
Is that what you´re saying?
I could also ask the ´what are they hiding´ question to the severe lack of documented evidence available from the scene, the withheld video tapes and sequestered 911 calls.
But I won´t. ;)

You mean you have "flyover" eyewitnesses, Mudlark? Who are they?
 
I´ve an idea.
Why don´t you go and ask the witnesses yourself?
Ask them if there was any important deleted footage that actually proves that what they MEANT to say wasn´t portrayed by the editting[sic].
Is that what you´re saying?
I could also ask the ´what are they hiding´ question to the severe lack of documented evidence available from the scene, the withheld video tapes and sequestered 911 calls.
But I won´t. ;)

Only complete idiots like Craig Ranke and Bloated Aldo spend their money trying to prove a ridiculous fantasy like a flyover.

Do you have the CIT, OC picture hanging above your bunk bed?

Please keep the tone civil. Thank you.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have no problem discussing witnesses who claim to have seen an impact.
I´m trying to discern how NOC coupled with an impact are physically possible.
They aren´t.
Therefore, your eyewitnesses are mistaken on the flight path. Since ALL other evidence points to SOC, SOC is the correct path.
 
I could also ask the ´what are they hiding´ question to the severe lack of documented evidence available from the scene,

You mean like the DNA recovered from the scene, or the photos of the plane debris? That sort of evidence?
 
I put my ´faith´ into people who were actually there that day with no axe to grind who were in a position to describe the plane´s approach. Especially if they corraborate from various positions.
This testimony is uncontaminated from ordinary people. That´s why I have ´faith´ in it.
So you can prove that everyone that eyewitnessed the plane SOC had some sort of axe to grind or an agenda? The fact that the interviewers do have an axe to grind as well as want attention and money doesn't phase you?
 
For you DNA is speculation as you wave your hands and dismiss real evidence for witness statements made years after the event. Good for you taking hearsay and faulty investigation techniques over reality and hard evidence.

For you the FDR is speculation, as you point to the implied no theory lies of Balsamo and his failed pilot web site with 11.2G failed math still posted.

Tell us all how the DNA for flight 77 passengers was found in the Pentagon and all you have to do to refute it is wave your hands and puke delusions from the idiot investigation team.

Do do a crime because DNA is evidence, and your posts are based on hearsay, faulty investigation techniques and lies. 8 years of failure.

Any links to the documentation on the DNA retrieval and identification?
Has the FDR been translated by anybody else and if so does it corrolate with testimony not only NOC, but the additional ´Annex witnesses´?
Even the very retrieval of the FDR has lead to contradictory reports.
The time the information was extracted from the FDR, the same.
Who actually found it, the same.
So forgive me if I have little faith in the actual official translation (if there is any I´m unaware of)
 
You mean like the DNA recovered from the scene, or the photos of the plane debris? That sort of evidence?
Let's not forget the eyewitnesses to the debris, smell of jet fuel, bodies still in their seats, etc. They don't count because they aren't on the approved list of the CIT cult leaders.
 
That argument doesn´t explain away the testimony. Every one of them had a view of the alleged impact zone? No.Could they have seen the plane NOC AND an impact? No.
If they couldn't see the impact they could surely have seen a large passenger plane climbing rapidly away, yes?

That's the trouble with the complete moron called Craig Ranke, he doesn't think things through.
 
Are you going to address the posts above concerning eye witnesses and physical evidence that you should debunk, or just say silly stuff like this?

I responded to a silly question.
150 witnesses who confirm the official path/story? I can´t discuss witnesses who have not been identified. Or a number plucked from the air.
Physical evidence? Documentation?
Please don´t post photographic evidence as you will get the same reply.
Is anybody going to address the posts and questions I have presented?
Boger´s testimony and it´s overwhelming corraboration?
Scroll up. It´s there.
 
Boger´s testimony and it´s overwhelming corraboration?
Has Boger joined the CiT, or supported them in any way? Have any of your 100% corroborated eyewitnesses supported CiT's conclusions?
 
Boger´s testimony and it´s overwhelming corraboration?
Scroll up. It´s there.

Wait, which part?

The part where you called him a liar, or the part where you basically admitted that his placement of the plane was unreliable?

Man, you are not very good at this are you??

Don't let Aldo eat you
 
Of course the CITiot ignores this from Boger:

Sean Boger said:
I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building. It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building.

I wonder why. :rolleyes:
 
Of course the CITiot ignores this from Boger:

I wonder why. :rolleyes:

In his defense, the CITiot did not ignore that. He just thinks Boger was a big fat liar.

Funny how the no planer at the Pentagon crowd gets very little traction calling their own witnesses liars.
 
In his defense, the CITiot did not ignore that. He just thinks Boger was a big fat liar.

Funny how the no planer at the Pentagon crowd gets very little traction calling their own witnesses liars.

I must have missed that. Even more hilarious!
 
Let's not forget the eyewitnesses to the debris, smell of jet fuel, bodies still in their seats, etc. They don't count because they aren't on the approved list of the CIT cult leaders.

Again, the undocumented debris.

I´ve always wondered when these ´bodies´ (plural?) were found exactly, and their exact whereabouts.

http://arlingtonfirejournal.blogspot.com/2005/03/attack-on-pentagon-sept-11-2001.html



Reaching the seat of the fire proved difficult. The heat was intense and the flames violent. Jet fuel is a blend of kerosene and gasoline, and Flight 77 was fully laden for the coast-to-coast flight.
Firefighters launched an exterior attack, using ladder pipes, airport crash tenders – all their big guns. They also attempted an interior attack. ``It was back breaking work carrying hose across that debris,’’ said Captain Scott McKay, who supervised interior fire fighting efforts. ``We were passing by some pretty good fires that on any other day would have been a major job to get to the big fire.’’

About 30 minutes after the crash, five floors gave way - COLLAPSE! ``It pancaked,’’ said Arlington Battalion Chief Jim Bonzano.


Gibbs led a crew of Fort Myer and Arlington County firefighters inside with a hose line. Considering the crack in the building, and seeing the firefighters were making little progress against the flames, Gibbs decided there was no need to place the firefighters' lives in jeopardy - and ordered them out. Within five minutes, ``there was a snap. Then you could hear it cascading down,'' Gibbs said.

The first firefighters allegedly arrived at @09:45, at what time did they enter?
We know they pulled out 5 minutes before the collapse having been beaten back by the flames according to Gibbs´quote.
But it was actually 15 minutes before the collapse:

9:55 - Incident commander orders evacuation of impacted areas (9/11 Commission Report, p315).

we received an order to evacuate the area because of reports that another jet was coming up the Potomac.

Then the numerous evacuations took place during that and the following day.

On Sept. 11 and in the days following, Pentagon police ordered firefighters - fearful of another attack - to evacuate when aircraft neared the crash site.
The fire, itself, wouldn’t die.
After the initial inferno was knocked down on Sept. 11, firefighters contended with flames and hot spots at the Pentagon, fed by jet fuel and mountains of rubble. ``It’s just stubborn, very difficult to get to and very difficult to extinguish,’’ said Plaugher, quoted by New York Newsday.

So the firemen you quoted must have seen the sights you describe after the collapse.

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

A study of the locations of fatalities also yields insight into the
breakup of the aircraft and, therefore, its influence on the structure.
The remains of most of the passengers on the aircraft were
found near the end of the travel of the aircraft debris.... By contrast,
the remains of a few individuals (the hijacking suspects), who
most likely were near the front of the aircraft, were found relatively
close to the aircraft’s point of impact with the building.
These data suggest that the front of the aircraft disintegrated
essentially upon impact but, in the process, opened up a hole
allowing the trailing portions of the fuselage to pass into the
building



This report claims that the columns along the path of ´impact´ were
exposed to high temperatures, including ´C´Ring where the majority of bodies were ´found´ where the HIGHEST temperatures were recorded over a longer period.
There were bodies admittedly found to the left and right of this ´path´ but..


Several structural elements in bays adjacent to the path of
aircraft impact in the first floor did not sustain damage by
impact. Rather, the damage to these elements was due to fire
exposure. Because the structural elements in the Pentagon are
believed to have had additional fire protection provided by the
interior finishes—while the laboratory columns were fully
exposed—and because the rate of temperature rise in the actual
fire is believed to be greater than that prescribed by ISO 834,
the comparison is not exact. However, it should provide an
indication of the lower bound of the temperature at some locations
in the Pentagon.

This coincides with an
ambient temperature of about 1,740°F (950°C).

Where in the building were these bodies allegedly found?
When were they found?

I´m in no way saying that these people are liars. Just that testimonies
become polluted and altered by the time they reach us.
That all testimonies must be questioned.

That is why it is so important to verify testimony especially in the circumstances described above.

Timeout guys. Back in a bit.
 
What I want to know is if any of CIT have actually told their witness'...

.... hey, you're saying it came North over Citgo, well we're using this in a film to claim that a plane flew over the Pentagon and then the government detonated a bomb and then faked all the bodes and DNA and plane evidence! Will you support us?

... Hmm, Dont recall them ever wanting to do that!

I wonder why!
 
Again, the undocumented debris.

Even Legasse said he saw plane parts when he went over and investigated after the impact. Why do you ignore that? Oh thats right, you think Legasse is a big fat liar. You also think he is a liar when he said he light poles get clipped, that one hit a black and orange cab and that the plane hit the pentagon. But many years later when he gets his perspective wrong, nope he is 100% telling the truth!
 
I´m in no way saying that these people are liars. Just that testimonies
become polluted and altered by the time they reach us.
That all testimonies must be questioned..

Irony Mud. Irony.
 

Back
Top Bottom