9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

a reply to: neutronflux

" I realized I was sitting at the closest point on the road that you could get to the Pentagon. I was less than 100 yards away at that particular exit and many of us in the traffic jam had our windows down. We were comparing notes -- what radio stations we were listening to -- when all of a sudden we heard a roar of a jet engine. I looked out of my front window and I saw movement over to the side. I turned and looked and the plane came from behind us and banked to the right and went into the Pentagon."

Where exactly was Gary Bauer?
He claims he was on I-395, but that cannot be correct, as he also claimed to be 100 yards from the Pentagon.
He claims traffic had not moved in 20 minutes, but as can be seen from the DoubleTree CCTV footage, the Residence Inn CCTV footage, an amateur video taken from high up in the DoubleTree Hotel, and the Anthony Tribby video shot in real time on the I-395, there was very little traffic on I-395, and it was moving freely.

So Bauer must have been on Route 27, northbound, very close to the Pentagon.
The further north you go on Route 27, the closer you get to the building, and this highway was in gridlock.
The plane flying over the Navy Annex would indeed have come from behind him.
Bauer must have been opposite the heliport,.

Note that he correctly states that the PLANE BANKED TO THE RIGHT.

This makes Gary Bauer a NORTHSIDE EYEWITNESS, who saw the PLANE BANK RIGHT.

a reply to: RubyGray

You

Steve Anderson was in an office 2 MILES NORTH of the Pentagon.
If you watch the videos taken in Joel Sucherman's office in the same building that morning, you will see the terrible view they had of the Pentagon, almost indistinguishable in the far distance. A plane would hardly have been noticeable from that far away.
This testimony was written long after 9/11, and he was never interviewed about what he supposedly saw.

So? You can see the pentagon correct? You can see a jet flying about 5 miles up, right.

Then you have the sound of the jet with witnesses giving no other explanation with what was heard flying overhead. Then his account t is backed by the flight path damage.

Remember all those testimonies and photos of people demonstrating the RIGHT BANK? Those people who were just across the road at Arlington Cemetery were beneath the plane, and were in the perfect position to know that the plane BANKED RIGHT.

Then quote them.
But the physical evidence supports banked left with eyewitness.

You wonder why I repeat myself.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

He said the plane BANKED LEFT.
NO it did not!
It banked RIGHT.

Are using blatant falsehoods

The Pentagon Event:
The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted


www.scientistsfor911truth.com...

The plane was rolled to the left, and the left engine hit the low concrete wall almost at ground level there, which was higher than the level of the lawn in the foreground. Given these facts, there is no mystery as to the absence of a gouge in the pristine lawn.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Just to remind you have zero credibility...

You

He said the plane BANKED LEFT.
NO it did not!
It banked RIGHT.

He said he SAW the plane "drug its left wing along the ground".
Obviously this DID NOT HAPPEN!
There was no evidence of any part of the plane hitting the ground before impact.

The plane hit the Pentagon at the first-floor level,[42] and at the moment of impact, the airplane was rolled slightly to the left, with the right wing elevated.[43]

Mlakar, Paul F.; Dusenberry, Donald O.; Harris, James R.; Haynes, Gerald; Phan, Long T.; Sozen, Mete A. (January 2003). The Pentagon Building Performance Report (PDF). American Society of Civil Engineers. Archived (PDF) from the original on June 24, 2008. Retrieved June 19, 2008.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

According to witnesses and the FDR data, the plane had rolled about 5 degrees counterclockwise when it hit the wall. Façade markings, such as a long gash made by a wing,

The Pentagon Event:
The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted


www.scientistsfor911truth.com...

The plane was rolled to the left, and the left engine hit the low concrete wall almost at ground level there, which was higher than the level of the lawn in the foreground. Given these facts, there is no mystery as to the absence of a gouge in the pristine lawn.

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

According to witnesses and the FDR data, the plane had rolled about 5 degrees counterclockwise when it hit the wall. Façade markings, such as a long gash made by a wing, confirm these observations

a reply to: RubyGray

Nice big ball of crap you posted. Care to actually use the protocol for quoting, provide the actual cited sources and links?

a reply to: RubyGray

You

Where exactly was Gary Bauer?
He claims he was on I-395, but that cannot be correct, as he also claimed to be 100 yards from the Pentagon.

Then prove it.

You

He claims traffic had not moved in 20 minutes, but as can be seen from the DoubleTree CCTV footage, the Residence Inn CCTV footage, an amateur video taken from high up in the DoubleTree Hotel, and the Anthony Tribby video shot in real time on the I-395, there was very little traffic on I-395, and it was moving freely.

Then link to the forensically dated verified and sworn to video.

You

So Bauer must have been on Route 27, northbound, very close to the Pentagon.
The further north you go on Route 27, the closer you get to the building, and this highway was in gridlock.
The plane flying over the Navy Annex would indeed have come from behind him.
Bauer must have been opposite the heliport,.

Then quote Bauer made such a claim.

And please explain what people witnessed hit the pentagon.

a reply to: RubyGray

More on traffic

Rains, Lon
In light traffic the drive up Interstate 395 from Springfield to downtown Washington takes no more than 20 minutes. But that morning, like many others, the traffic slowed to a crawl just in front of the Pentagon. With the Pentagon to the left of my van at about 10 o'clock on the dial of a clock, I glanced at my watch to see if I was going to be late for my appointment.
At that moment I heard a very loud, quick whooshing sound that began behind me and stopped suddenly in front of me and to my left. In fractions of a second I heard the impact and an explosion. The next thing I saw was the fireball.
I was convinced it was a missile. It came in so fast it sounded nothing like an airplane. Friends and colleagues have asked me if I felt a shock wave and I honestly do not know. I felt something, but I don't know if it was a shock wave or the fact that I jumped so hard I strained against the seat belt and shoulder harness and was thrown back into my seat.
"Eyewitness: The Pentagon," by Lon Rains, Editor, Space News
ratical.org...

Thompson, Phillip
. . . on my way to work Sept. 11, I saw an American Airlines jet come overhead and slam into the Pentagon, . . .
I was sitting in heavy traffic in the I-395 HOV lanes about 9:45 a.m., directly across from the Navy Annex. I could see the roof of the Pentagon and, in the distance, the Washington Monument.
I heard the scream of a jet engine and, turning to look, saw my driver's side window filled with the fuselage of the doomed airliner. It was flying only a couple of hundred feet off the ground -- I could see the passenger windows glide by. The plane looked as if it were coming in for a landing -- cruising at a shallow angle, wings level, very steady. But, strangely, the landing gear was up and the flaps weren't down.
. . . The fireball that erupted upon impact blossomed skyward, and the blast hit us in a wave. I don't remember hearing a sound.
It was so eerily similar to another experience during the Gulf War . . .
"COMMENTARY: Familiar feelings as the unimaginable unfolds," by Phillip Thompson, Military.com, 9/11/02

ratical.org...

a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby. What did these people witness impact the pentagon. How did the crew and passengers of flight 77 end up dead at the pentagon?

a reply to: RubyGray

Oh. Also forgot

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

You

The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, Washington said, knocking over light poles before hitting the ground on a helicopter pad just in front of the Pentagon and essentially bouncing into it."

What do you not get about WASHINGTON SAID? It’s right there in your own quote.

Then specifically quote from the people you invoke they specifically said the jet did or did not fly north of the bridge in their own words with links.

Why do I repeat? You make false claims of people laying. Then when questioned about proving proof of your allegations, you don’t.

The below article goes through and explains its conclusions.

Please quote which conclusions you believe are false, with cited evidence what you think makes it’s false.

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon
Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, ( B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.) January 2011


www.journalof911studies.com...


Summary and Conclusion
In response to FOIA requests the NTSB provided a CSV file and a coded FDR file. All contradictions between the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and these files appear to be traceable to missing data. In the case of the CSV file the data stopped about four seconds short of the impact. In the case of the FDR file the final frame was not initially decoded. Some researchers recognized that data was missing, while others claimed that the files proved the official account was false, as it appeared the flight terminated at a point too high to have created the observed damage trail on the ground.
Previous analyses were further confounded by uncertainty of the position of the last data point; failure to consider possible calibration errors in the pressure altimeter data, caused by high speed and low altitude; and false information in the NTSB flight animation.
The recent complete decoding of the FDR file has enlarged and clarified the information available and has thereby enabled resolution of the contradictions. It is clear that this file supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and the consequent impact with the Pentagon. The file thus also supports the majority of eyewitness reports.

And you original statement was..

Genuine FDR data would be corroborated by Serial Number identification.

The FDR claimed to have been found (by SEVERAL DIFFERENT PEOPLE, in SEVERAL PLACES, on SEVERAL DAYS), was never identified by any serial number.

Nor was any other piece of the plane debris found at the Pentagon identified to N644AA by a serial number.

According to the NTSB's official data, N644AA never took off that morning.

Which I asked..

This has been covered in this thread with the individual claiming the flight recorder data was false never produced such evidence.

Please quote the NTSB's data if that is the case.

The jet that hit the pentagon was tracked from the originating airport to the pentagon.

So you have lots of claims that you cannot quote and cite?

And now have completely ignored


originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray


Again..

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Again.

You

claiming they are lying,

Then quote from my posts which CITGO witnesses I said are lying

By omission, you acknowledge that you literally make crap up as it suits you. That your arguments are based on intellectual dishonesty.

So you posted a blatant falsehood?

a reply to: RubyGray

And you forgot....

Pilgrum said it best:
Added

None of that adds up to the cab being relocated for whatever imaginary nefarious purpose though or even the cab, all pieces of pole, broken glass and road damage being moved while we're at it.

How did all the damage associated with the cab and light pole get moved as questioned by Pilgrum?

originally posted by: neutronflux
RubyGray said :
Where exactly was Gary Bauer?
He claims he was on I-395, but that cannot be correct, as he also claimed to be 100 yards from the Pentagon.

Then prove it.

I just DID PROVE ALREADY that Gary Bauer was on the northern part of Route 27 beside the Pentagon west wall.

Apologies for transposing the "100 yards" reference from his comment about how far traffic had moved in 20 minutes, to his estimate of his distance from the building.

But he did claim to be very close to the Pentagon, and I-395 just is not that close.

I-395 had very little traffic on it, which was moving freely in both directions.
Again, see the DOUBLETREE VIDEOS, the ANTHONY TRIBBY VIDEO, the RESIDENCE INN VIDEO, the HERNANDEZ BRIDGE VIDEO.
Therefore, Bauer WAS NOT ON I-395.
He mistakenly referred to I-395 when he actually meant something else, as so very many Washingtonian eyewitnesses did.

So, as Bauer said he was stationary in gridlocked traffic, he MUST have been in the northbound Route 27 lanes, which is the ONLY highway that had gridlocked traffic at that time.
Again, see the STEVE RISKUS PHOTOS, the JASON INGERSOLL PHOTOS, the HERNANDEZ BRIDGE VIDEO, the AMATEUR TRIAGE SITE VIDEO.

If he was as he said, and "The closest place the Pentagon is ..." (He did not specify which exit he meant), then he MUST have been north of the impact site, as Route 27 gets closer to the Pentagon, the further north you go.

He was possibly referring to the exit from Route 27 into the Mall Entrance, where the gatecams were. This is the place where the Pentagon is closest to the highway.

He says they looked out their FRONT windows to see what was making that noise, but that they realised the PLANE was BEHIND THEIR CARS.

He says the PLANE then BANKED RIGHT.
Still BEHIND THEM ON ROUTE 27, as he did not witness the impact.

If the plane had been on the across-the-bridge flightpath, then BANKED RIGHT, it would have flown over SOUTH PARKING, and missed the Pentagon completely.

So Gary Bauer was a NORTHSIDE EYEWITNESS who saw the PLANE BANKING RIGHT behind him, but DID NOT SEE THE IMPACT.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray
And you forgot....

Pilgrum said it best:
None of that adds up to the cab being relocated for whatever imaginary nefarious purpose though or even the cab, all pieces of pole, broken glass and road damage being moved while we're at it.

How did all the damage associated with the cab and light pole get moved as questioned by Pilgrum?

You need to quit your tedious binge posting of the same inanities.

I have already pointed out several times, that those 2 pieces of pole lying on the bridge behind the passenger side of the cab, were relocated to the bridge from the cemetery site where Lloyde's cab was hit, on the same low loader trailer which transported the taxi.
One of these poles is the one that was fired through Lloyde's windshield, AS LLOYDE POINTED OUT ON A PHOTO, in the video "The Eye of the Storm".

The large lightpole lying there was obviously dragged into that position from its former location across the road, as the sharp scratch in the road surface from the corner of its base, across the lanes, proves. This is seen in the high resolution Jason Ingersoll photograph DSC_0421, where the orange low loader trailer that transported the cab, can also be seen in the background.

This telltale scratch is the ONLY "road damage".

The glass on the road is from the smashed lamp off the lightpole.

There is a little fine shattered glass on the road beside the driver's door of the cab, which would have come from inside when the cab door was opened. The interior was full of smashed glass.

But Steve Riskus took his 2nd photo showing shattered glass and skid marks on the road, north of the cemetery wall, where Lloyde was when the cab was hit. They didn't bother moving that glass.

The 4 VIDEOS most ASSUREDLY DO add up to the cab being moved for whatever nefarious purpose.
Obviously this was not done on the spur of the moment out of the goodness of anyone's heart.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Please quote the NTSB's data if that is the case.

The jet that hit the pentagon was tracked from the originating airport to the pentagon..

pilotsfor911truth.org...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, Washington said, knocking over light poles before hitting the ground on a helicopter pad just in front of the Pentagon and essentially bouncing into it.

What do you not get about WASHINGTON SAID? It’s right there in your own quote.

Then specifically quote from the people you invoke they specifically said the jet did or did not fly north of the bridge in their own words with links.

What YOU DO NOT GET, is the standard journalistic convention for first-person quotations.

When a journalist is quoting a witness verbatim, he MUST enclose that quote in QUOTATION MARKS.

That is not what this journalist did.
The journalist is merely SAYING that this is what Washington said.

This is NOT FIRST-PERSON EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY.
It is A THIRD-PERSON ACCOUNT AT BEST, and HEARSAY at worst..
We have no idea what Washington said, because there are no quotation marks.
This is prose invented by the journalist.

It is also UNTRUE!!

The plane DID NOT KNOCK OVER LIGHTPOLES.
The plane DID NOT HIT THE GROUND ON THE HELIPAD.
The plane DID NOT BOUNCE INTO THE PENTAGON.

Get out that map of yours, and draw in these 4 points :

1. The bridge.
2. The Helipad.
3. The impact hole.
4. The exit hole.

NOW DRAW A STRAIGHT LINE THROUGH THEM ALL.

And don't come back until you have either achieved that impossible feat, or you wish to apologise.

And until YOU have a first-person quote from ANYBODY, proving that they witnessed the plane flying across the bridge.

(CLUE : THERE IS NO SUCH PERSON.)

a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby.

Again.

You are willing to post blatant falsehoods

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Again.

You

claiming they are lying,

Then quote from my posts which CITGO witnesses I said are lying

By omission, you acknowledge that you literally make crap up as it suits you. That your arguments are based on intellectual dishonesty.

So you posted a blatant falsehood?

a reply to: RubyGray

It's been quite a while with a number of PC replacements and HDD crashes but here's a map of the area in question marked with AA77's final flight path into the Pentagon. Admittedly it's a simple straight line drawn from the last data in the DFDR to the impact point but the damage trajectory seems to line up very closely including the downed poles.
I had to resize the pic so hopefully it's legible enough.



And this pic I marked up a long time back to illustrate the compass error that caused much confusion (& still does)
IE the DFDR recorded bearing is referenced to magnetic North (it's a magnetic compass) but maps are aligned to true North and the variation between magnetic and true N in DC at the time was 11 degrees. That's why the rushed initial animation of the data showed the plane approaching on an incorrect trajectory (simple oversight). I marked both lines on the map, not super concise but just to illustrate the variation in plotting a magnetic bearing on a true North map.

If 77 crossed the pentagon lawn, some of those many cameras would have recorded it, and our military leadership would show those recordings to us, just as police body cams are shown to the public to make the case showing good police behavior, or not.

In 19 years the pentagon has not shown us those recordings. That strongly suggests that those recordings show something that works against the official story. That would make sense, for what wreckage was there was not consistent with that of a 757.

a reply to: neutronflux

Have you drawn that straight line on a map yet?
You remember, the one through the bridge, the Helipad, the entry hole and the exit hole.
The straight-line flightpath that you imagine Washington witnessed.

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: neutronflux

Have you drawn that straight line on a map yet?
You remember, the one through the bridge, the Helipad, the entry hole and the exit hole.
The straight-line flightpath that you imagine Washington witnessed.

Again...

You are willing to post blatant falsehoods

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Again.

You

claiming they are lying,

Then quote from my posts which CITGO witnesses I said are lying

By omission, you acknowledge that you literally make crap up as it suits you. That your arguments are based on intellectual dishonesty.

So you posted a blatant falsehood?

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: RubyGray

It's been quite a while with a number of PC replacements and HDD crashes but here's a map of the area in question marked with AA77's final flight path into the Pentagon. Admittedly it's a simple straight line drawn from the last data in the DFDR to the impact point but the damage trajectory seems to line up very closely including the downed poles.
I had to resize the pic so hopefully it's legible enough.

And this pic I marked up a long time back to illustrate the compass error that caused much confusion (& still does)
IE the DFDR recorded bearing is referenced to magnetic North (it's a magnetic compass) but maps are aligned to true North and the variation between magnetic and true N in DC at the time was 11 degrees. That's why the rushed initial animation of the data showed the plane approaching on an incorrect trajectory (simple oversight). I marked both lines on the map, not super concise but just to illustrate the variation in plotting a magnetic bearing on a true North map.

I guess your post was more truth than Ruby could handle. With Ruby having no explanation for what witnesses saw hit the pentagon. Especially the limited 10 or 12 north flight path witnesses that still attest to a passenger jet hitting the pentagon.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

RubyGray said :
"Steve Anderson was in an office 2 MILES NORTH of the Pentagon.
If you watch the videos taken in Joel Sucherman's office in the same building that morning, you will see the terrible view they had of the Pentagon, almost indistinguishable in the far distance. A plane would hardly have been noticeable from that far away.
"This testimony was written long after 9/11, and he was never interviewed about what he supposedly saw."

So? You can see the pentagon correct? You can see a jet flying about 5 miles up, right.

Then you have the sound of the jet with witnesses giving no other explanation with what was heard flying overhead. Then his account t is backed by the flight path damage.

Here is a photo of the view Steve Anderson had from the USA TODAY building, taken on the morning of 9/11.



When did the plane ever fly over this buiolding? It did not.
Many eyewitnesses who were on Route 27 right next to the Pentagon, stated that they did not hear the plane until it came level with them.
So how could Steve Anderson have heard it when it was miles away from him? He could not.

There is simply no way that Anderson saw the details he claimed to have.
His testimony is just a token nod to the official party line, written weeks after the fact, and incorporating material he had gleaned from media sources.

a reply to: Pilgrum
Thanks Pilgrum, Yes the pics are quite legible.
What really matters is whether they explain what happened that day.

There are some very interesting facts about Flight AA77 which impact on this story, all thanks to official data from the NTSB, the BTS, the FAA, and based on the FDR data from the plane claimed to have been AA77.

AA11, AA77 never left the ground on 9/11