Flyover Witnesses

[DarkMagician]

The question was "Who were the eyewitnesses to the flyover?"

Not "Who's statements do not agree with the evidence of the impact?"

In fact, most, if not all, of your witnesses would say the plane flew into the pentagon.

 

[Lyte Trip]

Besides the independently confirmed corroborating accounts that prove the plane flight path is irreconcilable with the physical damage in essence proving the flyover alternative.......


There are multiple accounts of a plane that flew over the building.

Although this has been described as a "2nd plane" this proves that there WERE accounts of a plane flying over the building timed perfectly with the explosion EVEN THOUGH this was not widely reported.

1. Joel Sucherman.

We have personally interviewed Joel at the new USA Today building and he told us that this alleged "2nd plane" flew over the Pentagon within 3 to 5 seconds of the explosion.


-Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, 'Is this thing coming around to make a second attack? If there is another explosion, we're toast.'"..."another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn't clear if that plane was trying to maneuver out of the air space or if that plane was coming round for another hit.

Clearly Joel is a witness to a plane flying over the Pentagon.

Whether or not this was a 2nd plane doesn't really matter because the point is that Joel's account demonstrates how EVEN THOUGH a plane was reported as having flown over the Pentagon this detail was apparently considered unimportant by the media and clearly not widely reported.

There are other accounts of this mysterious alleged "2nd" plane.

 

[uk_dave]

Mysterious? I thought it was the c130.

Thought everyone knew that.....

 

[Par]

I’ve lost count of how many witnesses specifically reported the plane heading towards the Pentagon and then pulling-up just before impact. Can someone help me out here? How many total?

 

[jaydeehess]

Sgt. Lagasse confirms Edward, Robert, and Sgt. Brooks' testimony of the plane flying on the north side of the gas station/Columbia Pike making it irreconcilable with the physical evidence and therefore supporting the flyover alternative.

EVEN IF they were correct and the plane was somewhere north (all three differ in just where the plane was) of the Citgo, how does this then bolster a flyover contention Lyte? EVEN IF the plane took a path somwhere close to the north side of the Citgo lot it can still impact the Pentagon. It is nota logical conclusion to state that IF the plane flew to the north of the Citgo it must have flown over the Pentagon. Any path that takes it over the Pentagon differs from a path that takes it into the building ONLY by the height of the aircraft.

 

[Lyte Trip]

Kelly Knowles also reports a plane flying over the Pentagon timed perfectly with the explosion.


Kelly Knowles:
-...she saw a second plane in the air *over the Pentagon* *as* a hijacked jet plunged into the five-sided military fortress...some sort of plane followed the doomed American Airlines jet toward the Pentagon, then veered away after the explosion. "Thank God somebody else saw that. There was most definitely a second plane, " Knowles said. "It's so frustrating because nobody knows about the second plane, or if they do they're hiding it for some reason." (Kelly sounds like a great actress) Pentagon official said late Friday no other plane was flying with the jetliner. But he said it was possible a military plane was in the area at the time of the attack. (that would sure fool a lot of people who saw a jet fly away)

Because there is no official story that accounts for any "2nd plane" that behaves this way we can only conclude that Kelly is a reported witness to a plane flying over the Pentagon.

Why wasn't this widely reported by the media or mentioned by other witnesses?

Clearly because this is part of a cover-story for other witnesses that happened to see the plane fly over the building as well.

 

[DarkMagician]

*BZZZT*

Sorry, we're looking for a witness to the flyover, not a witness to a second plane.

You're still running on zero.

 

[Pardalis]

Nope, try again.

 

[Lyte Trip]

EVEN IF they were correct and the plane was somewhere north (all three differ in just where the plane was) of the Citgo, how does this then bolster a flyover contention Lyte? EVEN IF the plane took a path somwhere close to the north side of the Citgo lot it can still impact the Pentagon. It is nota logical conclusion to state that IF the plane flew to the north of the Citgo it must have flown over the Pentagon. Any path that takes it over the Pentagon differs from a path that takes it into the building ONLY by the height of the aircraft.

Yes it is proof of a flyover Jaydeehess.

Not hypothetically but in relation to the physical damage we know for a fact that it would be impossible for a plane on the north side of the citgo station to cause the physical damage starting with light pole number one and ending with the c-ring hole.

 

[Par]

There are multiple accounts of a plane that flew over the building... Clearly Joel is a witness to a plane flying over the Pentagon.

I don’t think reports of any old plane flying in any way over the Pentagon are really what are being asked for. We, to quote Pomeroo, “want to see how many people actually observed a plane head toward the Pentagon and suddenly pull up without hitting it.”

 

[pomeroo]

Lyte is panicking. I thought he welcomed the truth?

Aluminum-siding salesmen and comedians live by the credo, Never let 'em see you sweat. Lyte is sopping and dripping all over the floor.

I think the game is ending, Lyte. Dozens of witnesses say that they saw an airliner crash into the Pentagon--they are all out of position, unreliable, planted by the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy, etc. The hazy testimony of a couple of guys places the plane where, according to you, it should not have been and, somehow, that's "definitive"?

I don't think you're going to get your fifteen seconds, Lyte. Still, Ace is scheduled to rave to an audience of mouth-breathing sub-morons. You could easily hawk a few DVDs there.

 

[DGM]

But Robert's account particularly supports the flyover alternative because he saw the plane literally "pull up" to miss the street sign and light poles.

From this statement that he pulled up to miss the light proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the plane had to hit the Pentagon. At the speed it was traveling it would not have had time to pull up. The plane would have had to already been climbing before it passed the gas station.

 

[Lyte Trip]

*BZZZT*

Sorry, we're looking for a witness to the flyover, not a witness to a second plane.

You're still running on zero.

So are you calling these witnesses liars?

They report a plane flying over the Pentagon immediately after the explosion.

So either your point is the fact that none of the other published accounts cite this plane that no such plane exists or that these witnesses are lying.

OR that they DO prove that a plane flew over the building.

Which is it?

 

[jaydeehess]

Sucherman saw another plane climb steeply and make a sharp turn. "I thought, 'Is this thing coming around to make a second attack?

another plane Lyte. He saw two planes. At no time does he ever state that the second plane rose out of the area directly above ( proximate in height, close to, within feet of) the Pentagon. It is abundantly clear that he was wondering if a second atack plane was coming in not that a plane that had attacked the Pentagon was coming around for another run.

 

[GlennB]

Kelly Knowles also reports a plane flying over the Pentagon timed perfectly with the explosion.


Kelly Knowles:
-...she saw a second plane in the air *over the Pentagon* *as* a hijacked jet plunged into the five-sided military fortress...some sort of plane followed the doomed American Airlines jet toward the Pentagon, then veered away after the explosion. "Thank God somebody else saw that. There was most definitely a second plane, " Knowles said. "It's so frustrating because nobody knows about the second plane, or if they do they're hiding it for some reason." (Kelly sounds like a great actress) Pentagon official said late Friday no other plane was flying with the jetliner. But he said it was possible a military plane was in the area at the time of the attack. (that would sure fool a lot of people who saw a jet fly away)

Because there is no official story that accounts for any "2nd plane" that behaves this way we can only conclude that Kelly is a reported witness to a plane flying over the Pentagon.

Why wasn't this widely reported by the media or mentioned by other witnesses?

Clearly because this is part of a cover-story for other witnesses that happened to see the plane fly over the building as well.

If you actually read Kelly Knowles' testimony -- slowly -- you'd be getting that horrible wrenching feeling in your guts that says "O Lord, I have made a total fool of myself".

I can only conclude that you haven't really read it, or are incapable of self-reflection.

 

[nicepants]

Yes it is proof of a flyover Jaydeehess.

Not hypothetically but in relation to the physical damage we know for a fact that it would be impossible for a plane on the north side of the citgo station to cause the physical damage starting with light pole number one and ending with the c-ring hole.

We're not asking for your gas-station trajectory analysis. We're asking for ONE single witness who saw flight 77 miss the pentagon. So far you have provided ZERO.

 

[Pardalis]

So are you calling these witnesses liars?

David Brent: How old would you say I was, if you didn't know me?

Employee: Forty?

David Brent: No, how old do you think I look?

Employee: Ummm... thirty-nine?

David Brent: Most people think I look about thirty.

Employee: Definitely not.

David Brent: Oh, are you calling them liars?

 

[Lyte Trip]

I've spoken with Keith Wheelhouse over the phone 3 times.

He confirms his account of a "2nd plane" "shadowing" the jet and veering away over the Pentagon just after the explosion. He identifies it as a C-130.

Keith Wheelhouse:
-He believes it flew directly above the American Airlines jet, as if to prevent two planes from appearing on radar while at the same time guiding the jet toward the Pentagon....As the hijacked jet started its descent, "it's like it stepped on its gas pedal, " Wheelhouse said. "As soon as he did that, the second plane banked off to the west." A possible explanation for the second plane could be a plane landing at nearby Ronald Reagan National Airport . The Pentagon is between the cemetery and the airport... (He) said it's possible the second plane was a military plane, but the military has not said it had a plane shadowing the hijacked jet."



Unfortunately for Keith we have had a dialog with the C-130 pilot himself who claims he did NOT see the plane hit the building or even know it was the pentagon that was hit so therefore the plane that Keith saw fly over the Pentagon had to be something else.

Either way Keith is a published account of a plane flying over the Pentagon.

 

[Par]

So are you calling these witnesses liars?

They report a plane flying over the Pentagon immediately after the explosion.

So either your point is the fact that none of the other published accounts cite this plane that no such plane exists or that these witnesses are lying.

OR that they DO prove that a plane flew over the building.

Which is it?

Again, as well you know, it isn't reports of any old plane flying in any way over the Pentagon that are being asked for. We, to quote Pomeroo, “want to see how many people actually observed a plane head toward the Pentagon and suddenly pull up without hitting it.”

 

[jaydeehess]

she saw a second plane in the air over the Pentagon as a hijacked jet plunged into the five-sided military fortress.

Two planes Lyte, one of which was hitting the Pentagon at the same time that she saw the other plane.

We all know that the other plane was the C-130. wWe all know that some described it as a jet but you already know that eyewitnesses may get some details incorrect, especially if those details fall outside of their personal expertise or day to day experience.