Flyover Witnesses

[Panoply_Prefect]

Maybe its in the researchers edition. When's that coming?

/S

 

[jaydeehess]

No one has asked about second aircraft Lyte but you keep brining it up. What we want is at least ONE witness to ONE plane that approached the Pentagon at high speed and then flew OVER ( proximate in height, close to, within feet of) the roof and pull up.

So far you have not provided any such account.

 

[Lyte Trip]

So we know that there were multiple reports of a plane flying over the Pentagon IMMEDIATELY after the explosion yet there is no official story to account for this.

There is ample evidence that proves the finite number of media reported accounts do not cover all details.

Since the official story of AA77 hitting the building was announced within 5 minutes after the attack it stands to reason that reporters on 9/11 would dismiss testimony that contradicts this as anomalous while reporting the testimony that supports this.

Bottom line we will NEVER know what people really reported without looking through the media filter because suspiciously.......

The 911 tapes were confiscated and permanently sequestered.

One overlooked extremely important category in regards to evidence at the Pentagon are the 911 call recordings. Critics of "The PentaCon" often say that there are no eyewitnesses of a plane that flew over the Pentagon. This is patently untrue if you consider the "2nd plane" witnesses we have already covered but it is also disingenuous because the real fact is that we will NEVER know what people really reported that day due to the fact that the 911 call tapes and transcripts were quickly confiscated and permanently sequestered by the FBI. This is just as important as the fact that they refuse to release any of the clear video of the event. 911 calls are typically available for the public and in fact they were released for the 9/11 attacks in New York. So why not in Arlington? We spoke with the Arlington County Communications office and the head commander at the time, Captain Michelle Nuneville.

We met with her in person and she played for us the fire and police dispatch tapes. She said that typically the 911 calls are always available as well and she seemed genuinely perturbed that they had never been released to the public. She is no longer in that position and has been replaced by John Crawford.

We have followed up with John about the 911 tapes and ultimately he said that he believes they will never be released in case they need to be used for a future trial to convict Bin Laden or someone. This makes no sense in light of the fact that they have released the 911 calls from New York. Why would they only release the calls from New York?

Obviously they would have no problem releasing this information if they had nothing to hide.

The day they release the 911 calls and the video tape of the event will be the day that the 9/11 fraud is exposed.

 

[pomeroo]

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.

Not to nitpick, Lyte, but some of us read this account and come away with a confirmation that " A HIJACKED JET PLUNGED INTO THE FIVE-SIDED MILITARY FORTRESS."

Now, it happens that this < FACT > is exactly what you deny. Without reminding you of your total inability to cope with the forensic evidence, let us note that "your" witness agrees with us. She most certainly did not witness your imaginary "flyover."

"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.

Whether Kelly is right or wrong about seeing a second plane, tell us WHO SAW A PLANE HEAD TOWARD THE PENTAGON, THEN PULL UP AND FLY OVER IT.

 

[jaydeehess]

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."

Well at the very least he most certainly is not saying that he saw a plane hit the Pentagon and then saw another plane. Your contention has been that witnesses saw a plane approach the Pentagon then, as the fireball occured and hid that plane, they saw another plane which was in reality that first plane. Anyone who saw both planes at the same time therefore does not support your contention.

 

[Gravy]

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.

You neglect to mention one little thing: Sucherman saw flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Why did you omit that fact, Craig Ranke? Panic much?

Sucherman, Joel
USAToday.com Multimedia Editor, saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work Tuesday morning. It was highly unusual. The large plane was 20 feet off the ground and a mere 50 to 75 yards from his windshield....

"My first thought was he’s not going to make it across the river to [Reagan] National Airport. But whoever was flying the plane made no attempt to change direction," Sucherman said. "It was coming in at a high rate of speed, but not at a steep angle -- almost like a heat-seeking missile was locked onto its target and staying dead on course."
"Journalist Witnesses Pentagon Crash," by John Dodge, eweek.com, 9/13/01

... There was a sonic boom and looking straight ahead there was a jet, what looked to be an American Airlines jet, probably a 757. And it came screaming across the highway, it was Route 110, on the west side of the Pentagon. The plane went west to east, hit the west side of the Pentagon. Immediately flames were strewing up into the air. There was white smoke. And then within seconds, thick black smoke. Everybody got out of their cars. People were shocked.

Then there was another plane that was off to the southwest and that made a beeline straight up into the sky and then angled off and we weren’t sure if that was going to come around and make another hit or if it was just trying to get out of the way. That disappeared and we didn’t see it again.

Interviewer: Describe the first plane again. You say it was a commercial jet. Do you know how many engines? I did not see the engines. I saw the body and the tail. And it was a silver jet with the markings along the windows that spoke to me as an American Airlines jet. This was not a commercial, a, excuse me, a business jet, right. It was not a Lear jet, a
Gulfstream, something like that. It was a bigger plane than that.
Real Player (Video): "Joel Sucherman, Assistant Managing Editor of USATODAY.com," 2001

This is Joel Sucherman, USAToday.com. On my way to work directly across from the Pentagon, about 100 yards away I saw an American Airlines jet screaming low. I heard a sonic boom. And then the impact, the explosion. There were flames that shot up, white smoke followed by black smoke. It did not appear to do a substantial amount of damage to the area. There was debris scattered about. There were light poles down. There was what appeared to be the outside covering of the American Airlines silver jet strewn about.

Fire trucks and police cars responded immediately. Within about two minutes there were fire trucks on the scene. Traffic stopped. People got out of their cars, started parking wherever they could. It was a shocking site. People started streaming out of the Pentagon. Within minutes there were thousands of people on the hill next to the small highway that runs
directly to the side of the Pentagon.

The impact hit on the west front side of the Pentagon. The plane came heading east. Again, it screamed low. You couldn’t even see the plane before it was about, oh 20 feet or so off the ground, screamed across the highway and slammed into the side of the Pentagon.

It was clear that the plane made no attempt to slow down or land; made no emergency movements at all.

Within a minute another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn’t clear whether that plane was trying to maneuver out of the way and out of the air space or if that plane was coming around for another hit as well. That plane ended
up disappearing into the sky.

Minutes later, helicopters started circling the Pentagon. And it was unclear at that point whether or not those helicopters were federal helicopters and traffic helicopters, part of the media trying to survey the scene, or whether or not they would be the next wave. There was no next wave. It was just the one single jet.
Real Player (Audio): "Joel Sucherman," USAToday.com
Both of the above linked to at: "Plane crashes in Pa.; unclear if related," USAToday.com, 9/12/01

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.

Panic much, Craig Ranke?

 

[DarkMagician]

So are you calling these witnesses liars?

No, I'm saying you're unable to understand what we're asking of you (or truthers in general).

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.

It is possible for their stories to be true, and the flyover theory still be false. Just because someone sees other planes doesn't mean that one of them is the plane that was supposed to hit the pentagon but flew over. Your idea to force a false dillema shows weaknesses in your research more than it proves your case.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

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.

This is how we know the plane flew by the SOUTH side of the Citgo station.

Physical evidence > eyewitness testimony.

 

[DGM]

So we know that there were multiple reports of a plane flying over the Pentagon IMMEDIATELY after the explosion yet there is no official story to account for this.

I have to know. Why would they have to account for it. I saw several planes fly over my house early that morning. No official word on those either.

 

[pomeroo]

Yes it is proof of a flyover Jaydeehess.

No, Lyte, you have convinced us that it is NOT proof of a flyover. No proof of a flyover is possible, as the event didn't occur.

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.

So, the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy planted abundant evidence consistent with the crash of a commercial airliner, but neglected to make the crash possible? Is that what you're claiming, Lyte? Your clock is ticking, Lyte. The number of witnesses to a flyover remains zero, and you still haven't broken your sensational story to any real news outlet.

 

[Lyte Trip]

So there you go kids.

Ample evidence of a plane flying over the Pentagon.

You can have no explanation for this data without dismissing it out of hand or conceding that a plane flew over the building.

Even if you believe this was a 2nd plane the point is that you MUST accept that a plane flew over the building THAT WAS NOT WIDELY REPORTED OR SEEN BY MOST OF THE WITNESSES.

So if this is the case then you can no longer say that the finite number of media accounts proves a flyover didn't happen.

We believe there are more reports of this in the 911 calls.

We believe there are more witnesses to this as well who have either written off what they saw as an inconsequential 2nd plane or are too scared to talk about what they saw.

We have talked to SEVERAL previously unpublished witnesses who describe the plane as NOT looking like an AA jet but with different coloring.

Most unpublished witnesses describe it as "white".

No matter how you look at it any plane that flew over the building was considered unimportant to the official story and therefore either not reported by the media or not mentioned by the witnesses because it was not the plane that "hit the building".

These are just SOME of the questions in regards to the anomalous and extremely dubious official Pentagon story.

Did I mention that Russell Pickering has proven that the evidence was tampered with?

 

[JimBenArm]

JREF: Did they see the plane pull up and fly over?
LYTE: This one said they saw a second plane seconds after.
JREF: Not a second plane. Did they see the plane pull up and fly over?
LYTE: You calling her a liar?

Man, you just can't make this kind of stuff up!

Lyte, don't ever change! You're comedy gold, man!

 

[Lyte Trip]

[/i][/b]You neglect to mention one little thing: Sucherman saw flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Why did you omit that fact, Craig Ranke? Panic much?


Panic much, Craig Ranke?

Haha.

I'm not panicking one bit.

We know the data we have is conclusive and we are getting more every day as our investigation continues.

YOU are the one who has been demonstrated to push garbage data and incorrect information in your blog.

You refuse to back up your nonsense claims with evidence because you know they are false and that your admirers will lap it up regardless.

You can deny the implications of the "2nd plane" accounts all you want but no matter how you look at it.....they are evidence supporting a plane flew over the Pentagon and there is NO official explanation for this.

 

[WildCat]

I see Craig Ranke is still unable to produce a single witness to a plane pulling up and flying over the Pentagon as the explosion takes place.

Who ya crappin' with this flyover nonsense Craig?

 

[Lyte Trip]

Well at the very least he most certainly is not saying that he saw a plane hit the Pentagon and then saw another plane. Your contention has been that witnesses saw a plane approach the Pentagon then, as the fireball occured and hid that plane, they saw another plane which was in reality that first plane. Anyone who saw both planes at the same time therefore does not support your contention.

You aren't really this clueless are you?

Please tell me this is an act.

 

[WildCat]

You can deny the implications of the "2nd plane" accounts all you want but no matter how you look at it.....they are evidence supporting a plane flew over the Pentagon and there is NO official explanation for this.

No, it is evidence of a 2nd plane, the first plane flew right into the Pentagon and killed many innocent people.

What is so hard for you to understand about a "2nd plane"? Clearly, it's not the 1st plane.

 

[SpitfireIX]

Lyte is panicking. I thought he welcomed the truth?

Not exactly. He welcomes The Truth^TM.

 

[Lyte Trip]

No, it is evidence of a 2nd plane, the first plane flew right into the Pentagon and killed many innocent people.

What is so hard for you to understand about a "2nd plane"? Clearly, it's not the 1st plane.

Whatever you want to believe.

So why didn't all the other witnesses see or report this "2nd plane"?

Does this prove there was no "2nd plane" and that these accounts are fabricated or does it prove that all of these people hallucinated the "2nd plane" just like you believe all the citgo witnesses hallucinated the plane on the north side of the station?

 

[twinstead]

For the love of God Lyte quit embarrassing yourself.

I have NEVER in my life seen so much rhetorical gymnastics to hold on to an untenable position.

Now. Back to the witness thread and explain how all those witnesses who actually DID see a plane impact the Pentagon are lying.

While your at it, explain please your apparent double standard when it comes to witnesses you think support your opinion, and those who don't.

Perhaps now is the time to get off this forum and get off your butt and actually present your rock-solid evidence to proper law enforcement agencies. Obviously your evidence has put all these crazy shills in their place, the next step is to alert the media.

 

[DarkMagician]

You aren't really this clueless are you?

Please tell me this is an act.

Just because you haven't managed to learn reading comprehension doesn't mean all opposed to your theories are just faking.