9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

a reply to: RubyGray

If what you post is true, try this. Use ATS protocol for citing, quoting, and linking to a source for verification. Or you just putting your own delusions in witness accounts again.

a reply to: RubyGray

Vision depth perception declines a lot at distances somewhat over 30m especially for brief events that prevent looking for references to gauge the range. So, for example, someone at Arlington could see the plane over the CITGO but without some other visual indication they'd be unable to determine it as being 100' closer or 100' further away. The plane's shadow crossing a known stationary reference object would be an excellent indicator for that.

That depth perception enters into the statement "The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station" as it did cross her line of sight to the CITGO so in a split second glance would appear as she says.

She states she looked to her left, no indication of how far left to see the plane approaching unless there's better info you have on hand.

In her case the plane crossed the highway diagonally, not at a right angle so she was able to view it banking left as it approached the Pentagon for a second or less because it was flying away from her at an angle of approx 37 degrees to the direction her car was pointing. That gave her enough time to recognise some key features like banking, windows, stripes and AA markings etc. Her car, being left hand drive, allowed her to view everything from the highway crossing to the Pentagon through the windshield unobstructed.
So, yes, she would have had an excellent view of the underside of the banking plane

originally posted by: Pilgrum

(Morin) could be mistaken about finer details but not about seeing the plane descend past the trees and the only flight path fitting that observation is the 'south' one which, unsurprisingly, fits the path of physical damage like VDOT tower, light poles, Elgas's wingtip, penetration through the Pentagon as well.

He either witnessed it or he didn't - his account is unambiguous in that regard (he saw it)

Went through all this like a decade ago so I'm a bit rusty on details.

How could he have "seen the plane descend past the trees"?
It was already flying across the Navy Annex, therefore the 5-storey building was blocking his view of the plane as soon as it passed overhead. He absolutely rejected the idea of the southside flightpath.

Craig Ranke's video, "Over the Navy Annex (Featuring Terry Morin)" gives us the best testimony from Morin.

youtu.be...

Have you looked at Jason Ingersoll's photos? The first 2 in the series show exactly the view Morin had. See this webpage for all the photos up to Lloyde on the bridge.

www.thepentacon.com...

Morin could not see the Southside flightpath leading to the impact site. The line along the south wall of the Navy Annex, extended to the east, meets the southwest corner of the Pentagon. Try drawing it yourself on a map. I know some people fudged the line in the attempt to "prove" Morin was a southside witness.

But Morin says "No!"

Morin ... because it flew right over the top of me.
Ranke ... Now were you between the wings of the Navy Annex or were you out on the ...
Morin I was right at the edge of the inner and outer portions OK. So when the plane went right over the top of me I was within 10 feet of the edge of the Navy Annex.
Ranke You were kind of in there between them. Or were you outside of the edge?
Morin I was INSIDE, it flew over the top of me, OK. Which is like it's right on the edge and I'm like here, OK.
...
Ranke. What are the chances that the plane was actually on the south side of Columbia Pike completely? Or on the south side of VDOT?
Morin No freakin' way. No freakin' way. No freakin' way. He was right over the top of me.
Ranke You're 100% certain of that. He was right over the Navy Annex.
Morin I am. He is on the edge of the Navy Annex, not completely over it. Right? Ok.
Ranke But the plane itself would be on the north side of Columbia Pike at that point.
Morin Yeah. Yeah. I mean this is Columbia Pike. OK? There's a fence here. Right. I'm inside the fence. OK. He went right over the top of me.
Ranke ... but there's no way the plane itself, or even the right wing, was on the south side of Columbia Pike?
Morin Nope.
...
Ranke There's some room for error, but there's not enough room that the plane could have been on the south side of Columbia Pike?
Morin Absolutely not.

So Morin is definitely a witness to the plane flying on the Northside path.

The VDOT tower was not actually hit by anything. The Paik brothers saw repairmen working on it the next day and assumed it had been hit. But Craig Ranke asked the VDOT Manager about this, and was told that it was an unrelated issue.

The rusty looking mark on the VDOT camera pole on the bridge is no proof of anything. Nobody saw this pole hit by a plane wing, and there is no proof that this mark was anything other than rust, or that it was caused on 9/11.

Nobody saw the plane fly across the bridge
CIT could not find a single witness who would say they saw the plane fly over the bridge, nor that it hit those lightpoles.
Nobody else even tried to find anyone to support the Southside flightpath.
Everyone else was content to assume the Official Story was true, and to ridicule CIT's work without any first-person testimony to back up their belief.

a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby. You claimed I calked the “north flight play” witnesses liars.

Then you cannot produce that post on request.

Then you acted like you never made such a claim.

You make false claims about what people post. You make false claims about your own posting.

Why would anyone find you credible at this point?

a reply to: RubyGray

So? Nothing actually worth quoting with links to nothing but truth movement propaganda.

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: RubyGray
In her case the plane crossed the highway diagonally, not at a right angle so she was able to view it banking left as it approached the Pentagon for a second or less because it was flying away from her at an angle of approx 37 degrees to the direction her car was pointing. That gave her enough time to recognise some key features like banking, windows, stripes and AA markings etc. Her car, being left hand drive, allowed her to view everything from the highway crossing to the Pentagon through the windshield unobstructed.
So, yes, she would have had an excellent view of the underside of the banking plane

You don't seem to have actually read what I already posted on the previous page. Penny Elgas said the plane came STRAIGHT ACROSS, not diagonally.

"Yes, she looked LEFT. She did not look BEHIND.

"The Citgo station was directly west of her position, so she would see it by looking left.

"She said to Jeff Hill,
" 'I thought it was going to hit the gas station when it just skimmed. THE WING CAME OVER THE TOP OF THE ROOF OF THE GAS STATION STRAIGHT FROM ACROSS THE STREET. I THOUGHT IT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO HIT IT.'

"But if the plane had been on the Southside flightpath, neither of its wings would have been anywhere near the Citgo.
"This confirms that she saw the plane on the Northside trajectory.
"And in that case, she is necessarily referring to the RIGHT wing being over the NORTH "side" of the Citgo."

Neither have you tried to draw this for yourself on an overhead map. That is the most useful and enlightening thing you can do to educate yourself on what is or is not possible, and to make sense of the various eyewitness testimonies.

The Southside flightpath runs right over the top of Elgas' car, coming from BEHIND it, NOT to the left.

This is absolutely not what she described!
She said the plane was FOUR OR FIVE CAR LENGTHS IN FRONT OF HER CAR when it crossed the highway.
She said she could SEE THE RIGHT WING TIP IN FRONT OF HER.
Ergo, it DID NOT COME FROM BEHIND HER.
IT DID NOT FLY OVER HER CAR.
IT DID NOT FLY AT A 37 DEGREE ANGLE.

The obvious reason that she could see underneath both wings, is that it was SO FAR IN FRONT OF HER, and that it was POSSIBLY 80 FEET ABOVE THE ROAD.

Not because it was "banking left".

Try doing scale drawings, of her car, with the fuselage 5 car lengths in front, and up to 80 feet off the ground.
How much of the underside of each wing could she see? Right, ALL OF THEM.

Next, take another look at all the testimonies, and physical demonstrations, of the plane banking RIGHT as it approached the Pentagon.

Then do more drawings of the Southside flightpath crossing Elgas' car on that angle, and ask yourself how she could possibly have craned her neck around behind to see the plane approaching ...

And also ask yourself how she could have seen the plane wing above the Citgo roof, if it was actually way south of it.

a reply to: RubyGray

Based on what cited sources? Are you making crap up again?

a reply to: RubyGray

This is how quoting works.

Use a bracket, quote, bracket

Link and cite to a source.

Paste quote

Bracket, use a /, quote, close bracket.

Example

Analysis of Eyewitness Statements on 9/11
American Airlines Flight 77 Crash into the Pentagon
by Penny Schoner

ratical.org...


Elgas, Penny
Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station . . .
. . . I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times . . .
. . . At the second that I saw the plane, my visual senses took over completely and I did not hear or feel anything -- not the roar of the plane, or wind force, or impact sounds.
The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building.
"Statement from Penny Elgas - Personal Experience At The Pentagon on September 11, 2001," Supporting Material - September 11: Bearing Witness to History, National Museum of American History

Link from the reference sources

amhistory.si.edu...

amhistory.si.edu...

Statement from Penny Elgas
Personal Experience At The Pentagon on September 11, 2001
By Penny Elgas

amhistory.si.edu...

I had an early appointment on September 11th, so I drove to work later than usual. I work at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation near the White House. I headed north on 1-395 to DC from my home in Springfield, Virginia and I entered the highway a little after 9am so that I could take the High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) express lane. As usual, traffic was very heavy and after I exited I-95, I found myself stuck in late morning rush hour traffic -- almost in front of the Pentagon. For most of my drive I had been totally focused on my radio and was extremely aware of the events that were unfolding in New York. Even though the radio reporters were cautious, I was already convinced from the first strike that it was not just an unfortunate pilot error. However, I felt that New York was under attack and I couldn't have imagined what would unfold in front of me.

Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there. My first thought was “Oh My God, this must be World War III!”

In that split second, my brain flooded with adrenaline and I watched everything play out in ultra slow motion, I saw the plane coming in slow motion toward my car and then it banked in the slightest turn in front of me, toward the heliport. In the nano-second that the plane was directly over the cars in front of my car, the plane seemed to be not more than 80 feet off the ground and about 4-5 car lengths in front of me. It was far enough in front of me that I saw the end of the wing closest to me and the underside of the other wing as that other wing rocked slightly toward the ground. I remember recognizing it as an American Airlines plane -- I could see the windows and the color stripes. And I remember thinking that it was just like planes in which I had flown many times but at that point it never occurred to me that this might be a plane with passengers.

In my adrenaline-filled state of mind, I was overcome by my visual senses. The day had started out beautiful and sunny and I had driven to work with my car's sunroof open. I believe that I may have also had one or more car windows open because the traffic wasn't moving anyway. At the second that I saw the plane, my visual senses took over completely and I did not hear or feel anything -- not the roar of the plane, or wind force, or impact sounds.

The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick. I later realized that it was probably the rubble of churning bits of the plane and concrete. The churning smoke ring started at the top of the fuselage and simultaneously wrapped down both the right and left sides of the fuselage to the underside, where the coiling rings crossed over each other and then coiled back up to the top. Then it started over again -- only this next time, I also saw fire, glowing fire in the smoke ring. At that point, the wings disappeared into the Pentagon. And then I saw an explosion and watched the tail of the plane slip into the building. It was here that I closed my eyes for a moment and when I looked back, the entire area was awash in thick black smoke.

I was not sure what to do next. Everyone started to emerge from their cars and, with looks of horror and disbelief, many began to beg for cell phones to call 911, to call family, or to call the story in to their newspapers. I continued to listen to the radio and everything was still about the events in New York.

What interview and what was the interview date for what your referring too?

a reply to: RubyGray

What did Penny Elgas see hit the pentagon.

a reply to: RubyGray

And what is your point? Your trying to say Penny is credible while trying to discredit her? When her account is backed by actual physical evidence?

What do you not get

The plane seemed to be floating as if it were a paper glider and I watched in horror as it gently rocked and slowly glided straight into the Pentagon. At the point where the fuselage hit the wall, it seemed to simply melt into the building. I saw a smoke ring surround the fuselage as it made contact with the wall. It appeared as a smoke ring that encircled the fuselage at the point of contact and it seemed to be several feet thick.

amhistory.si.edu...

What did penny see “melt into the building” if it was not flight 77?

a reply to: RubyGray

You still need to answer to this. You have a serious problem of putting your words in other people’s mouths then acting like it never happened

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby.

You posted this....

Scores of eyewitnesses saw the plane flying on the North-of-Citgo flightpath.

YOU simply ignore or attempt to discredit the witnesses, claiming they are lying, incoherent, or manipulated to tell a false story. These criticisms fail for lack of proof. The NORTH-OF-CITGO witnesses cannot be explained away in any credible fashion.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I did not post the north flight path witnesses lied.

Or quote from my posts that show otherwise.

I called you out on the same page. Page 60.

You
claiming they are lying,

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

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then on page 64 you made this delusional post

You are constantly posting blatant lies about me.
And I am a member of ATS!
So what does that say about you?

You repeat yourself ad nauseam.

You obfuscate this thread with hundreds of repetitive nonsense posts just to keep the pages rolling over so that sensible intelligent people will give up trying to follow the actual narrative.

I have no idea where this fabled post of mine is that you keep nagging about. Maybe 10 pages ago?

So why don't you quote it for me, with relevant page and date, so that I can address your chronic whinge properly?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You posted blatant falsehoods about what I posted.

Then quote where I “constantly posting blatant lies about you”.

You literally make crap up. Why should I find you credible when you make false allegations against ATS members.

originally posted by: RubyGray
You don't seem to have actually read what I already posted on the previous page. Penny Elgas said the plane came STRAIGHT ACROSS, not diagonally.

"Yes, she looked LEFT. She did not look BEHIND.

"The Citgo station was directly west of her position, so she would see it by looking left.

"She said to Jeff Hill,
" 'I thought it was going to hit the gas station when it just skimmed. THE WING CAME OVER THE TOP OF THE ROOF OF THE GAS STATION STRAIGHT FROM ACROSS THE STREET. I THOUGHT IT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO HIT IT.'

"But if the plane had been on the Southside flightpath, neither of its wings would have been anywhere near the Citgo.
"This confirms that she saw the plane on the Northside trajectory.
"And in that case, she is necessarily referring to the RIGHT wing being over the NORTH "side" of the Citgo."

Firstly, I take anything from CIT & Co with a giant grain of salt because they obviously had an agenda of self promotion more than fact finding. A lot of cherry-picking went on there.

I've looked at Penny's early statement and can't see where she says the plane crossed the road at a right angle (IE Straight). What she does state is:

"Traffic was at a standstill. I heard a rumble, looked out my driver's side window and realized that I was looking at the nose of an airplane coming straight at us from over the road (Columbia Pike) that runs perpendicular to the road I was on. The plane just appeared there- very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station that I never knew was there."

The CITGO was due west of her location and the SOC flight path goes between her location and CITGO so, momentarily, the plane would appear in the same frame as CITGO from her perspective. IE pretty much coming straight at her and appearing "very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station"

In your version of events - can you explain how the plane hit the Pentagon without left banking if it came from Penny's left at a right angle to the highway crossing a few car lengths in front of her?
Plot that on a map and it's headed for the car park but the plane hit the building and the point of impact is a definite therefore what you propose is an infeasibiity. Try fitting curves to known inarguable points like the plane being directly over Terry Morin, 5 car lengths ahead of Penny Elgas on crossing the highway and the impact point on the Pentagon and tell me if it looks doable.

I think Penny might have been a little further south than the point on your map but not enough to make a significant difference based on her statement (again):

"I remember thinking that I could puncture my tires - but in that same thought, I vowed to keep driving, even if I had to ride home on the tire rims. As the car moved slowly forward in traffic, I realized that I was still headed toward my office and I absolutely did not want to go there - my office is on Pennsylvania Avenue, just a few doors down from the White House. So I made my way across the lanes of traffic and instead, I exited into the Pentagon's parking lot. I circled around to the right and came out under the road that I had just been on -- headed toward I-66 West."

So she moved forward (distance unknown) before crossing lanes to get onto the off-ramp.

Yes I have plotted all these points (even the outrageously wrong ones) on maps around a decade or more ago and my conclusions are unchanged upon revisiting it all now.

a reply to: charlyv

Glad you agree this is a VERY IMPORTANT THREAD!!!

It is so frustrating how many forums with threads like this, have been sabotaged by photobucket and other sites. It's almost as if it was deliberate. These forums ought to be permanent archives of the great research that has been done by the regular public, research which was never carried out by the authorities. But so many times when you try to look something up, links are broken and photos gone.

a reply to: RubyGray

Glad you agree this is a VERY IMPORTANT THREAD!!!

Delusions of grandeur over fabricated mythology concerning the property damaged to a single light pole that ignores all the flight path damage, doesn’t answer the question what physically killed the personal at the pentagon, and how the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon.

originally posted by: Pilgrum
Firstly, I take anything from CIT & Co with a giant grain of salt because they obviously had an agenda of self promotion more than fact finding. A lot of cherry-picking went on there.

Do you have some examples of this?
"Cherrypicking" is an accusation I have frequently seen levelled at CIT, but never has there been anything to substantiate it.

They sure did find a lot of facts.
I have much respect for most of their work, although they started off on the wrong foot with Lloyde England who was their first interviewee, and with Father Stephen McGraw who was their second.
That followed on to their false accusations against Joel Sucherman and some others.

What they failed to get was that almost all the people they dismissed, were in fact genuine North-of-Citgo witnesses.
And one northside witness they promoted, was in fact an operative (Steve Riskus).

Their interviewing technique improved considerably with experience, but they just could never handle the cases of witnesses related to Lloyde England's cab where it was photographed on the bridge. They lost the plot over those photos. They knew 9/11 Pentagon was a psy-op, but fell into the trap themselves because of the circumstantial "evidence" of Lloyde's cab on the bridge.

That caused the acrimonious cyberwars and their eventual fade into oblivion, I believe.

I just wish they would do some soul searching, eat some humble pie, and get back to work on this.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Glad you agree this is a VERY IMPORTANT THREAD!!!

Delusions of grandeur over fabricated mythology concerning the property damaged to a single light pole that ignores all the flight path damage, doesn’t answer the question what physically killed the personal at the pentagon, and how the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon.

Thanks, I really do appreciate the way you keep posting these screenshots from the videos showing Lloyde England's cab with a pole through the windshield, there beside the cemetery wall, exactly where he testified that he was. It is good of you to keep reminding everyone that the Official story is now in tatters.

I have never seen any evidence of plane passengers ending up inside the Pentagon. There needs to be a legally established chain of custody to prove that each sample of DNA tested was actually retrieved from the Pentagon, and I am not convinced this exists.

I am not alone in my scepticism.

a reply to: RubyGray



Ruby. Someone played with the exposure and changed it to a negative image/setting. And the damn thing still shows no pole. Your only enforcing that you have a fabricated delusion.

a reply to: RubyGray

You

I have never seen any evidence of plane passengers ending up inside the Pentagon.

Blatant falsehood by you...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

You

trumps two blurry screengrabs from 1 frame per second Gatecam videos which were in the possession of the FBI for 3 years.

Get over it.

You referring to this?

Blink Comparator Views of
the Plane at the Pentagon

By David Chandler, based on prior work by Ken Jenkins

911speakout.org...

Note that when barrel distortion is eliminated, the image compression near the edge of the field is eliminated, so the plane appears longer, with proportions resembling a 757. (Remember, the plane is also moving toward us at about a 45 degree angle.)

One feature of the plane image helps us identify it as an American Airlines plane. Note the purple stripe along the side of the plane. American Airlines planes have parallel red and blue stripes. At the small scale of the original image it is quite likely that this purple stripe is a merger of the color information from a red and a blue stripe.

Backed by 30 to 100 witnesses that attest to a large passenger jet hitting the pentagon.

Backed by radar data.

Backed by flight recorder data.

Backed by flight path damage

The Overall Damage Path
As related by most eyewitnesses, a large plane flew low from the highway over the Pentagon lawn and hit the Pentagon West wall. Descriptions from various witnesses, photographs and FDR data fill in details that include:
 The plane knocked down several light poles
 The left wing finally was tilted down
 The right engine struck a generator trailer
 The left engine struck a low concrete wall
 The plane mostly disappeared into the building
 There was a large fireball
 The façade had a hole 18 ft wide where the plane body is presumed to have hit
 There was a gash 96 ft wide where plane wings would have hit
 The lawn was untouched afterwards except for debris
 Windows above the 18 ft wide hole were unbroken
 The internal column damage indicates the path direction of material and debris flow from the exterior
inwards
 There was a hole in the C ring wall that was roughly circular
 The downed light poles, trailer damage, low concrete wall and façade damage, interior columns
damage, and hole in the C ring are in a straight line
 The direction of this line is in accordance with the radar reports and the FDR file.
The overall appearance of the damage trail is consistent with the passage of a large plane. The façade can be viewed as a giant shredder (steel plus concrete) through which a plane has passed at high speed, further shredding itself by impacting the interior supports and by the edge-on impact with the second floor, and creating inside the building a high velocity flow of material that builds up pressure on the C ring wall until it gives way. A substantial amount of debris flows out through the hole created.
The overall damage trail weighs against the “flyover” theories, the small plane theory (separation of light poles in a direction perpendicular to the path is about 100 ft), and the missile theory. The direction of the damage trail is contrary to a north-of-CITGO path for the plane. To continue to be viable, one must add a staged event to these theories.

www.scientistsfor911truth.com...

Backed by the remains of victims of flight 77 recovered from the pentagon.

Charles Frank "Chic" Burlingame III (September 12, 1949 – September 11, 2001) was the pilot of American Airlines Flight 77,

Burlingame was buried in the Arlington National Cemetery.


en.m.wikipedia.org...

Always remember: Suzanne Calley of San Martin died when terrorists flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon

gilroydispatch.com...

Two years after that fateful day when Calley, 42, perished Sept. 11 alongside 183 other victims at the Pentagon site, Jensen cremated his wife’s body. Her remains were first pulled by rescue crews from the twisted wreckage of Flight 77, and later scattered by Jensen into the Pacific Ocean near Monterey. This is where the couple frequently taught classes together as master scuba instructors.

D.C. Teachers, Students Die In Pentagon Crash

mobile.edweek.org... 55-CC2980C3ACA9

Besides Ms. Taylor, the two other Washington teachers who died in the crash were Sarah Clark, a 6th grade teacher at Backus Middle School, and James Debeuneure, who taught 5th grade at Ketcham Elementary School.

The three students from Washington lost in the crash were Bernard Brown, who attended Leckie Elementary; Rodney Dickens, who attended Ketcham Elementary; and Asia Cottom, from Backus Middle School. All three were 11.

Sacred Ground
On 9/11: The ring that survived the inferno

BY ANELIA K. DIMITROVA Sep 13, 2011

www.communitynewspapergroup.com...

When crews eventually cleared the debris, among other personal effects on the site of the tragedy, investigators found a one-carat ring, size 6.8, its band bent, its prongs crooked but still holding firmly in place the solitaire diamond.

Looking at the picture of the ring, in a binder of images of personal effects FBI agents discovered at the crime scene, Peter Batacan, Karen’s husband, could hardly believe his eyes. He took a closer look at the serial number.

It was the same ring he had surprised Karen with on June 27, 1995, when he dropped on one knee under the elm tree in one of their favorite parks in Bethesda, Md., and asked her to marry him.

Snip

Receiving Karen’s ashes and having them placed in her final resting place in the niche in the church, where on the 10th anniversary congregation members will lay flowers, gave Peter some level of comfort as did a memorial service he and Karen’s family attended later in Waverly.

a reply to: RubyGray

You

I have never seen any evidence of plane passengers ending up inside the Pentagon.

Why do you still argue in absolutions, just makes you less credible?

a reply to: Pilgrum

Pilgrum wrote :
"The CITGO was due west of her location and the SOC flight path goes between her location and CITGO so, momentarily, the plane would appear in the same frame as CITGO from her perspective. IE pretty much coming straight at her and appearing "very low in the air, to the side of (and not much above) the CITGO gas station" "

Yeahbut it didn't.
I don't know what you are looking at, but the Official Flightpath goes nowhere near the Citgo.
It passes about 100 yards to the south of the southern side of it.
And we have concrete proof (CCTV footage and logged radio call) that Sgt William Lagasse saw the plane flying NORTH OF THE CITGO.

The plane would have been coming from BEHIND Penny Elgas if it had flown on the Southside track, and she said it didn't.

She saw it to her LEFT, coming STRAIGHT towards her, as you quoted from her early written testimony, and as I quoted from the transcript of her phone interview with Jeff Hill.

She saw the plane's wing apparently above the Citgo roof (from her position), which could not have happened if the plane came
from behind her.

She said the plane crossed the highway 4 - 5 car lengths IN FRONT OF HER.
That would put her, according to the Southside flightpath, back behind the overhead sign on the bridge.
But she had a good view of the impact site, and we know that witnesses in that position could not see the impact site, because of the group of trees blocking their line of sight.

She wrote in her long testimony that she was above the "grassy embankment", which means she was further north of the overpass, in the HOV lanes opposite the northeast cloverleaf (now gone).
This puts her directly beneath the Official Flightpath, making the plane fly diagonally across her car.

But since this is not what she testified to, she cannot be claimed as a Southside witness.

She said the plane was "NOT MORE THAN 80 FEET OFF THE GROUND" where it crossed the highway.
That is plenty high enough for her to have seen the underside of both wings.
It is certainly high enough for the plane to have flown over the Pentagon, just1 1/2 seconds later.
That is far too high for this plane she saw to have been the object skimming the lawn in the Gatecam videos.
Her description of the plane "simply melting into the building" is surreal in the extreme.


Pilgrum wrote :
"In your version of events - can you explain how the plane hit the Pentagon without left banking if it came from Penny's left at a right angle to the highway crossing a few car lengths in front of her?"

Good question. Thought-provoking.

According to many eyewitnesses, the plane BANKED RIGHT as it approached the pentagon.

According to the FDR data file obtained from the NTSB by Rob Balsamo of Pilots for 911 Truth under FOIA request, the plane carrying that FDR was indeed in a RIGHT BANK.

This can be seen on their video "American 77 flightpath Version 2."

youtu.be...

No, there is no possible way for me to explain how the plane hit the Pentagon at the explosion site without banking left, if it was on the Northside flightpath.
Nor can I explain how it could have hit the Pentagon if it DID bank left from the Northside flightpath.
Neither could it have created that directional damage path if it banked right.