9/11 Pentagon: The Mystery of the Moved Taxi

a reply to: neutronflux

That carries as much weight as a butterfly sneeze, sorry.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

That carries as much weight as a butterfly sneeze, sorry.

So? You cannot create a counter argument to the cited material. Nice.

The truth movement argument is never really a truthful argument, ironic.

Rant much? Again. What caused the flight path damage, the damage to the pentagon, and how did the wreckage, crew remains, and the passenger remains of flight 77 end up at the pentagon?

a reply to: Salander

This is what has also been posted at ATS

Brian Austin and Steve Pennington, Transcript, “Oral history interview with Brian Austin and Steve Pennington,” interview by Diane Putney, Historical Office, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 9 November 2006.

history.defense.gov...

a reply to: Pilgrum

Actually, I just measured the angle that Penny Elgas would have had to crane her neck around behind her to see the nose of the plane coming straight towards her, IF it was flying on the official trajectory, and it is 155 degrees. Not 140 degrees as you calculated.

Then of course as she was directly beneath the Official Flightpath, she could NOT have seen the entire plane, from wingtip to wingtip, crossing the highway about 5 car lengths in front of her car, and 50 to 80 feet AGL.

There is no way that Penny Elgas' testimony supports the Southside path.

And since she DID NOT SEE a plane flying at ground level across the lawn on the Southside path, she MUST have seen it on the Northside path, far too high to hit any lightpoles, on the wrong angle to make the directional damage path inside the building, high enough to have overflown the roof.

Therefore she DID NOT SEE A PLANE HIT the building, and the complex description she gives of the explosion MUST refer to some force/s unknown.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Pilgrum

You forgot the swapping out of the staged cab with a decoy cab with a pole sticking out of its windshield in heavy / stopped traffic. And nobody seeing or hearing the machine that shot a pole into the cab at the cemetery wall in Ruby’s mythology.

There was NO HEAVY TRAFFIC IN THE SOUTHBOUND LANES.
There was no traffic in them at all, except for vehicles involved in the staged scene, vis.

The decoy cab
Lloyde England's cab
Steve Riskus' red sedan
The white van
The tow truck & trailer.

This can be proven by the numerous photos and videos taken in the first few minutes post impact, until after the towtruck exited the bridge, and some traffic was allowed southbound past the cab next to the pole, from 9:47 a.m. until about 9:52 a.m. there is nothing in the southbound lanes except the above vehicles, up to 9:45 a.m.

Actually, many witnesses saw and heard the "thing" that fired the pole through the taxi windshield.

TV reporters commented on it and quoted military personnel who had seen it, within the first few minutes, but after that, all media mention of it was suppressed.

There was an "official" interview with a military historian which supposedly identified this "thing", but that was a lie. Two photographs and several videos prove that this identification was bogus, but nobody has ever been able to determine what really happened.

YOU ACTUALLY GUESSED WHAT IT WAS!

YOU MENTIONED IT BY NAME IN ONE OF YOUR POSTS!

a reply to: neutronflux

"therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.com...
"It should also be noted that the highway traffic cameras which conspiracy theorists claim would have a "clear shot" of AAL77 hitting the Pentagon were not installed until early 2003. "

This is not true.

Craig Ranke interviewed staff including the Operations Manager (committed suicide a few days later) of the VDOT building about these traffic cameras, and was told that they WERE functioning, but that it was not policy to continuously record from these cameras until after a request by police attending an accident. By then of course, it was far too late to "record" anything.

Craig filmed inside the monitor room, and was shown the very monitor on which the plane would have been captured flying over the bridge - if indeed it had flown over it. That is, the monitor from the VDOT camera on the pole just south of the overhead sign on the bridge, that pole with the circular rust mark on it which people claim was made by the wing of AA77 before it hit the 5 lightpoles.

Craig was told that by the time the plane flew across (and this would have been WITNESSED by the person seated in front of that monitor, also by staff at other monitors from at least 2 cameras further up the road), it was "too late to record anything; the plane had already hit the Pentagon".

Staff inside the VDOT building definitely saw what happened. The traffic cameras WERE INSTALLED AND FUNCTIONING, as confirmed by VDOT staff.

The "suicide" of young family man Christopher Landis within a few days of Craig Ranke interviewing him, being given the entire Jason Ingersoll photo collection by Landis, and being given permission to film inside the offices, on the roof and in the vehicle depot housing spare lightpoles and a low loader trailer (almost identical to the one in the ingersoll photo of Lloyde England's cab on the bridge, that trailer on which it was relocated from the cemetery wall), is tragic and deeply suspicious.

This has been very occasionally mentioned over the years, but is never followed up, possibly because of the nature of his death being a taboo subject. I think it deserves much more attention and investigation. Landis was in a key position, professionally and physically, to know a great deal more about the event than almost anybody else. I do not suggest that he was personally involved, but that he knew more than was good for him, and that he was a whistleblower who was dealt with.

a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby.


Again.

At least 14 witnesses attest to a large jet knocking over light poles / utility poles. With the jet being witnessed low enough to the ground to clip trees.

If the jet approached from the north, there should be a north flight path of damage. But there is no evidence of such a second path of damage.

To be more specific. On 9/11, many witnesses saw a large passenger jet hitting crap heading towards the pentagon. There is no evidence a large jet was hitting crap along the north flight path.

a reply to: RubyGray

Now this is interesting?

CIT admits doing a faulty investigation
www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: Pilgrum

Actually, I just measured the angle that Penny Elgas would have had to crane her neck around behind her to see the nose of the plane coming straight towards her, IF it was flying on the official trajectory, and it is 155 degrees. Not 140 degrees as you calculated.

You are really bad at this.




Google street view of position Penny would be at that best matches her testimony. The real flight path that actually happened, is marked with a red line. The Citgo gas station would be where the red box is. The numbers above the flight path show how many degrees she would have to turn to see the plane in that position. This flightpath fits her description perfectly.

As you can see, you would have to turn much further to clear your blind spot, before changing lanes.

You really need to do better Ruby.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: Pilgrum

Actually, I just measured the angle that Penny Elgas would have had to crane her neck around behind her to see the nose of the plane coming straight towards her, IF it was flying on the official trajectory, and it is 155 degrees. Not 140 degrees as you calculated.

You are really bad at this.

Google street view of position Penny would be at that best matches her testimony. The real flight path that actually happened, is marked with a red line. The Citgo gas station would be where the red box is. The numbers above the flight path show how many degrees she would have to turn to see the plane in that position. This flightpath fits her description perfectly.

As you can see, you would have to turn much further to clear your blind spot, before changing lanes.

You really need to do better Ruby.

CIT garbage in, truth movement garbage out🤪

a reply to: waypastvne

A picture is worth a 1000 words they say, uses about 3000 times the memory but worth every byte

I noticed a slight variance compared to the numbers I got from the map Ruby posted and it's due to the angles being measured from the centre of the bridge whereas the map shows her location approx 23m past the centre of the bridge. Not a big deal at all but being a few car lengths further back makes it easier for moving a little further forward before crossing lanes to get onto the off ramp to the right.

It also improves her view of the plane crossing the road

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Now this is interesting?

CIT admits doing a faulty investigation
www.abovetopsecret.com...

No it is not interesting, the links are broken, and CIT never admitted any such thing.
It is a puerile trumped-up specious premise for an excuse to parade poor research skills and bigoted ignorance.

a reply to: RubyGray

You don’t follow the link...

CIT is done, it is time for them to go home.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

megaman1234

I have seen thread after thread after thread where the CIT group has been utterly and completely blasted with facts and figures and evidence, and have responded with nothing of any substance. I must admit - when I first saw their theory, it seemed interesting. But looking at it for any length of time reveals very clearly that it lacks any depth at all. So in short - I'd like for people to post what one CIT point or claim was so ridiculous, that it cemented for you the idea that they cannot be taken seriously in any way. I am sure there are many examples of shaky reasoning, poor manners, and boring repetitive denials.

1) Honestly for me – it was that silly little tagline: “We ain’t playin’”. Which made it plainly obvious that they really have no desire to be taken seriously by anyone over 23 years old.

2) My other big bone came back when we were talking about – was it McGraw? Anyway – he was a priest, who in a horribly shameful attempt to discredit; Craig tried to make out as a child molester by association 3 degrees removed. It was a disgusting display; no research organization of any repute would stoop to such a level. If there was any validity to their claims, they would not have to resort to such tactics.

3) The fantastic post by the captain, on the validity of eyewitness statements. It shreds the CIT idea of “Utter scientific proof by way of a handful of witnesses” to pieces. Of course, published papers by respected members of the scientific community mean nothing to groups like CIT.

4) I encourage everyone to read the current thread on the CIT flightpath. Notice the utter lack of meaningful responses from Mr Craig Ranke. They seem to think that by repeating the same line over and over again makes it true.

I could go on and on here, but here is one more I thought was pretty funny – it was posted by another CIT guy on another forum – and explains how they got their witnesses.
“They wouldn't be "laughed at" or "ripped to shreds". They were there filming what they thought was a documentary on 9/11, one that focused on the attack and on a side note putting to rest the theories about missiles and global hawks. They didn't know the interview was about the details of the approach. They weren't there to give EXACT, PIN-POINT COMPUTER ACCURATE details. They just gave their story and answer the questions we asked. Part of telling their story was pointing to where they saw the plane. They did this without knowing the implications or realizing that is what we wanted.”

In short they had to LIE to their witnesses to get them to say what they wanted. Think about that for a second. They knew if they told them what they were doing, their prized witnesses likely would have had nothing to do with them – so they had to make up a story to get them on camera. It makes you think what other LIES they had to tell them to lead them to their claims. It completely invalidates ALL of their interviews, which is all they have anyway. Seriously, if they admit they lied to their heroic witnesses, doesn’t that pretty much kill whatever integrity they had? How can anyone trust what they have to say?

They are not to be trusted, and are interested in only shameless self-promotion.



I have seen many threads asking the questions like “what finally made you not believe the official story”, so let’s do it to these guys now.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: Pilgrum

Actually, I just measured the angle that Penny Elgas would have had to crane her neck around behind her to see the nose of the plane coming straight towards her, IF it was flying on the official trajectory, and it is 155 degrees. Not 140 degrees as you calculated.

You are really bad at this.

Google street view of position Penny would be at that best matches her testimony. The real flight path that actually happened, is marked with a red line. The Citgo gas station would be where the red box is. The numbers above the flight path show how many degrees she would have to turn to see the plane in that position. This flightpath fits her description perfectly.

As you can see, you would have to turn much further to clear your blind spot, before changing lanes.

You really need to do better Ruby.

Save your smug insults for yourself.

You do not even understand the question.
You have placed Penny Elgas about halfway along the approach to the overhead sign on the bridge.
This is not where she was. She was about the same distance NORTH of the overhead sign, as you have her SOUTH of it.

You have not bothered to study the various testimonies as to her location.
Where you have placed her, there is that pesky group of trees on the southeast cloverleaf, which blocks the view of the impact site completely. This can be proven by watching the videos showing that section of Route 27, which were taken on 9/11..
Also, this section of the highway is on an incline, so the brow of the overpass also blocks out the lower floors of the building.

MIKE WALTER described what she did.
"... smoke started billowing out then it was chaos on the road as people either tried to move around the traffic and go down either forward or back which we had a lady who was in front of me who was BACKING UP and screaming, "Everybody go back, they've hit the Pennagun'. CNN Interview on 9/11.

Penny Elgas wrote, describing what she did after attending the Pentagon Memorial Service on 10/11:

"We made our way to the other side of the building, through the parking lot and up onto the grassy embankment not far from where my car had been on the morning of September 11th. Victoria and I climbed up the embankment with reverence, but I was not prepared for the overwhelming anguish that I would experience when I turned around and viewed the gashed building again."

Where you have placed her, she could not have seen the gash in the building. She HAD to be north of the overhead sign.
In the Jason Ingersoll photos, she is standing north of the overhead sign.

The flight pat you mentioned may well be the official story but that does not make it true.
Her position on the decline from the overhead sign, means that she was exactly where the plane would have crossed Route 27 ... IF it flew on the Southside path.
Then, looking at the overhead which I plotted, she MUST have turned around 155 degrees, to look down the path of the plane headed straight for her.
However, YOU have the plane passing in front of her and to her left side.

Yes, the plane did pass to the front of her, but as she was much further north than you admit, this means she was looking at the plane ON THE NORTHSIDE FLIGHTPATH.

You are measuring to the centre of the Citgo but Penny said the plane flew to the SIDE of it.
Since it is established that she is a NORTHSIDE witness, then she must have seen the plane fly NORTH OF THE CITGO.

In that case, the Southside flightpath did NOT happen, and YOUR image is bogus.

a reply to: RubyGray

Remember how talking in absolutes makes you less credible?

You

He claimed that they were "pushing patients on gurneys". Gurneys are wheeled trolleys, which were not used that morning.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then you doubled down?

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: neutronflux

EVERYTHING I claim is on the videos, IS THERE.

Just you keep on ignoring it.

Rumsfeld did not push any patients down the road on tourneys.
He only carried backboard across the lawn.
Doctors, nurses and paramedics pushed tourneys down the highway on tourneys.
Anyone who watches the videos, can see this.

Found this Ruby Gray flicker page with this picture?

www.flickr.com...@N02/




What is at the feet of the person labeled Rumsfeld? Looks white with the only possibility of being what?

Ps. I don’t see no highway...

Then you claimed I posted the north flight path witnesses were lying. Either that was a blatant falsehood, or quote where I made such a post.

a reply to: RubyGray

Again.

At least 14 witnesses attest to a large jet knocking over light poles / utility poles. With the jet being witnessed low enough to the ground to clip trees.

If the jet approached from the north, there should be a north flight path of damage. But there is no evidence of such a second path of damage.

To be more specific. On 9/11, many witnesses saw a large passenger jet hitting crap heading towards the pentagon. There is no evidence a large jet was hitting crap along the north flight path.

a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby what hit the pentagon.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Ruby.


Again.

At least 14 witnesses attest to a large jet knocking over light poles / utility poles. With the jet being witnessed low enough to the ground to clip trees.

If the jet approached from the north, there should be a north flight path of damage. But there is no evidence of such a second path of damage.

To be more specific. On 9/11, many witnesses saw a large passenger jet hitting crap heading towards the pentagon. There is no evidence a large jet was hitting crap along the north flight path.

We have been over all this at length already, and you had your denial specs on then too.
NO WITNESSES SAW THE PLANE HIT ANY POLES!
Because it FLEW ON THE NORTHSIDE PATH!
There is not a single witness associated (By journalists!) with the concept of the plane hitting those poles, who would confirm when questioned, that they actually SAW it happen.

The witnesses who are confirmed in photos and videos as having been on the bridge, DENY SEEING THE POLES HIT.

That list of "lightpole witnesses" is bogus. It is full of
* NORTHSIDE WITNESSES,
* THIRD-PERSON ACCOUNTS BY THE MEDIA,
* DEDUCTIONS & ASSUMPTIONS MADE AFTER THE FACT.

Here (AGAIN!!!) are the FACTS about witnesses seeing the poles get hit.


1. Steve Riskus: 
"I could see the "American Airlines" logo … It knocked over a few light poles in its way."

WHAT RISKUS ACTUALLY SAW :

Italian website :

Q: Steve, did you see the plane hitting light poles? Did you see light poles falling down?
RISKUS: I DIDN'T see the plane hit the poles and I DIDN'T see the light poles falling down.
I saw them AFTER they were ALREADY on the GROUND.

He drew the flightpath of the plane, perpendicular to the building, across the Heliport tower.

HE WAS A NORTHSIDE WITNESS.

He was about 1,300 feet north of the bridge, therefore could not have seen the 5 downed lightpoles from his location.

 

2. Mark Bright: 
"… at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down."

WHAT THEY OMITTED :
"I saw the plane at the NAVY ANNEX area," he said. "I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low ...”

He is a NORTHSIDE WITNESS.

He saw the plane fly across the NAVY ANNEX.

A plane on this trajectory CANNOT have hit the 5 downed lightpoles, nor made the directional damage inside the Pentagon.

From his position at the guard shack north of the Pentagon, 1,700 feet away from the poles, he COULD NOT HAVE EVEN SEEN THE POLES.

 

3. Mike Walter: 
"… it clipped one of these light poles ... and slammed right into the Pentagon right there."

Mike Walter said this within minutes of the impact.
The reporter said they had heard the pole hit a taxi.
Walter stammered and said he DID NOT SEE THAT.
He changed his story every time he told it for years.
He admitted on TV the following morning that he had no view of the impact site because of trees (on the southeast cloverleaf) blocking his view.
He proved himself an unreliable witness.

 

4. Rodney Washington: 
"… knocking over light poles"

By Robert Schlesinger and Wayne Washington, Globe Staff, 9/12/2001
Rodney Washington, a systems engineer for a Pentagon contractor, was stuck in stand-still traffic a few hundred yards from the Pentagon when the American Airlines jet roared overhead from the southwest ... 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.

NOT first-person eyewitness testimony.
This is THIRD-PERSON comment by the journalist.
At several hundred yards away, Washington COULD NOT SEE the lightpoles.

The plane DID NOT BOUNCE on the helipad.

 

5. Kirk Milburn:
"I heard a plane. I saw it. I saw debris flying. I GUESS it was hitting light poles."

“GUESSING” is NOT EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY.

CIT contacted the deceased Milburn’s son to verify his location, and confirmed that HE HAD NO VIEW OF THE LIGHTPOLES.

 

6. Afework Hagos: 
"It hit some lampposts on the way in."

NOT EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY.

Was driving on Columbia Pike. Does not give his exact location, and does not state that he witnessed the impact, nor that he SAW the poles being hit.

 

7. Kat Gaines: 
"Saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles."

“Her commute to the airport took her south on Route 110, in front of the parking lots of the Pentagon. As she approached the parking lots, she saw a low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles.
“She then HEARD the plane power up and plunge into the Pentagon.”

NOT first-person eyewitness testimony.

She was on the OPPOSITE SIDE of the Pentagon, so could not see the impact.

Yet she claimed to have seen the plane flying low, EAST of the Pentagon, BEFORE the impact (like several other witnesses on that side of the Pentagon).

NO TELEPHONE POLES were knocked down.

She was 2,800 feet to the EAST of the overpass bridge, therefore CANNOT have seen the 5 downed lightpoles.

 

8. D.S. Khavkin: 
"First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles."

HOW would she know???
Aldo Marquis went to the trouble of looking up the address of this witness, who wrote that she HEARD what “APPEARED TO BE A SMALL AIRCRAFT” fly directly overhead of her apartment.

Her apartment was at 2001 Columbia Pike, Arlington, west of the Sheraton Hotel.

She DID NOT SEE the plane, but was reciting what she heard and saw in the media.

OVER 3KM from the Pentagon.
She is NOT a witness!

 

9. Wanda Ramey: 
"I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant.”

'Wanda Ramey (CONTACTED/INTERVIEWED by CIT), cannot remember if she thought she actually saw the plane hit a pole or simply DEDUCED IT AFTER SEEING IT ON THE GROUND, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE WE SPOKE WITH.'

 

10. Penny Elgas: 
A piece of American Airlines Flight 77 was torn from the plane as it clipped a light pole. It landed in her car. Now in the Smithsonian Institution's 9/11 collection.

ASSUMPTION!

Jeff Hill phone interview 2009:

HILL You saw it? You saw it hit one of the light poles?
ELGAS No I didn't see it HIT. 
I HEARD ON THE NEWS that it hit a light pole. 
But that's how I ended up with a piece of the plane. Is that it clipped the pole. The tail. That was actually the tail that I turned in to the Smithsonian, a piece of the tail.
HILL What I was reading it fell into your car?
ELGAS Well that's what THEY said, but THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED.
HILL Er you just picked it up or?
ELGAS I picked it up.

 

11. Lincoln Liebner: 
"It was probably about 30 feet off the ground, clipping the lampposts. I could clearly see through the windows of the plane. It was maybe going 500 miles an hour – when it just flew … into the Pentagon ... less than100 yards away."

Liebner does NOT SAY HE WITNESSED THE PLANE HITTING LIGHTPOLES.

Here are two other things he said, which contradict the Official Story:

"The aircraft went in between the 2nd and 3rd floors."

Captain Lincoln Leibner says the aircraft struck a helicopter on the helipad. (ABC)

Captain Liebner drew the flightpath of the plane which he witnessed.

He believed it flew perpendicular to the building, at the level of the Heliport Tower, and much further north and higher than the impact hole.

This makes him a NORTHSIDE WITNESS.

This plane COULD NOT have hit the 5 lightpoles, nor made the directional damage inside the Pentagon.

a reply to: RubyGray

Again..


Again.

At least 14 witnesses attest to a large jet knocking over light poles / utility poles. With the jet being witnessed low enough to the ground to clip trees.

If the jet approached from the north, there should be a north flight path of damage. But there is no evidence of such a second path of damage.

To be more specific. On 9/11, many witnesses saw a large passenger jet hitting crap heading towards the pentagon. There is no evidence a large jet was hitting crap along the north flight path.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

List of accounts for you to prove wrong

Light Pole Witnesses

aneta.org...

D. S. Khavkin, from the eighth floor of a high-rise building:
"... knocked down a number of street lamp poles"
news.bbc.co.uk...

Kirk Milburn, a construction supervisor for Atlantis Co. was on the exit of Interstate 395.
"... saw debris flying. I guess it was hitting light poles."
a188.g.akamaitech.net...

Afework Hagos, 26, of Arlington, stuck in a traffic jam on Columbia Pike,
"It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance. It hit some lamp posts .."
www.guardian.co.uk...

Kat Gaines, a Fairfax County Fire & Rescue technician was heading south on Route 110, by the parking lots to the south when she saw a "low-flying jetliner strike the top of nearby telephone poles." She "then heard the plane power up" and plunge into the Pentagon.
www.fccc.org...

Vin Narayanan, a reporter for USA TODAY was driving near the Pentagon
www.usatoday.com...
"The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me"
www.usatoday.com...

Rodney Washington, a systems engineer for a Pentagon contractor, was stuck in the traffic a few hundred yards away:
"... knocking over light poles "
www.boston.com...

Steve Riskus took pictures less then 1 minute after the impact
www.criticalthrash.com...
"It knocked over a few light poles on its way..."
www.humanunderground.com...

Father Stephen McGraw was waiting on the northbound side of Washington Boulevard. driving to a graveside service at Arlington
"The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car.
www.dcmilitary.com...
www.mdw.army.mil...

Jim R. Cissell, a former photojournalist, drives past the Pentagon every day on his way to work at the Newseum in Arlington, Va.
enquirer.com...
.".. taking out telephone and power lines on its way in, hit the building."
www.cincypost.com...

Noel Sepulveda, a Master Sgt. was walking back to his motorcycle in the Pentagon South Car Park
It "The plane’s right wheel struck a light pole, causing it to fly at a 45-degree angle.".", he said.
The plane tried to recover, but hit a second light pole and continued flying at an angle. "You could hear the engines being revved up even higher,"
www.af.mil...

Colonel Bruce Elliott, a World War II and Korean War Chemical Mortar Battalion veteran and a former commander of the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant wasalso in the Parking Lot
"... the craft clipped a utility pole guide wire, which may have slowed it down a bit"
www.thehawkeye.com...

Air Force Honor Guard members were at the end of the cemetery directly across the highway from the Pentagon.
" They had heard, some had seen a plane coming in skimming trees and light poles."
www.bgcworld.org...

Mark Bright, 32, a traffic patrol officer was the first to arrive at the scene after seeing the plane from his guard booth by the Mall Entrance.
"-- at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down."
He also said he heard the plane "power-up"
www.dcmilitary.com...
206.181.245.163...

Wanda Ramey, a DPS master patrol office watched from the Mall plaza booth.
"I saw the wing of the plane clip the light post, and it made the plane slant. Then the engine revved up."
www.mdw.army.mil...

Michael Anthony K (aka 'Mimi Angelica') a 42-year-old firefighter-paramedic saw
"...poles lying on the ground that had apparently been knocked over by the plane as it headed for the building."
www.angelfire.com...

Mike Walter, 46, a USA Today reporter, said
"...It turned and then it went around ..it clipped one of these light poles."
Recorded interview - quick load Recorded interview - best quality

Richard Benedetto, another USA TODAY reporter said,
The only thing we saw on the ground outside there was a piece of a ... the tail of a lamp post.
Recorded interview - quick load / May 2002. Recorded interview - best quality / May 2002.

A Pentagon Navy Admiral said,
"It was a good size jet aircraft. I saw it clip a light pole but keep coming ..."
Houston Chronicle, 9/11/01 - Michael Hedges
(mirror) www2.hawaii.edu...

Don Fortunato, a plainclothes detective with the Arlington (Va.) Police Department, was walking into his office when he heard a muffled explosion. He dashed to the scene.
“Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.”

LaVern L Schueller, a Military Chaplain surveyed the scene after the event.
"The top of a light pole was knocked off on an overpass. The FBI had marked it as evidence. The top of a light pole had been knocked off on the street that goes by the Pentagon. It too was marked as evidence. And finally, it took out the entire light pole near the sidewalk.
www.aapc.org...
www.nwfdailynews.com...

Frank Probst, dove to the ground to avoid a passing jet engine.
"On either side of him, three streetlights had been sheared in half by the airliner's wings at 12 to 15 feet above the ground. An engine had clipped the antenna off a Jeep Grand Cherokee stalled in traffic not far away."
www.militarycity.com...

a reply to: RubyGray

Like it or not. People saw a large jet knock into crap and hit the pentagon.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Again...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

I picked the below quote for:

One, the person was in standstill traffic

Two, the person is stated “The plane was flying low and rapidly descended, Washington said, knocking over light poles“

Three. It’s a lesson in perspective. We know the jet only hit a low concrete wall with an engine. But, because of perspective, it looked liked it bounced off the ground to the witness

Four. The account is fresh after 9/11.

Boston Globe

By Robert Schlesinger and Wayne Washington, Globe Staff, 9/12/2001

archive.boston.com...


Rodney Washington, a systems engineer for a Pentagon contractor, was stuck in stand-still traffic a few hundred yards from the Pentagon when the American Airlines jet roared overhead from the southwest.

''It was extremely loud, as you can imagine, a plane that size, it was deafening,'' Washington said.

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.

Sad to see you resorting to an intellectually dishonest temper tantrum.


What was that about gurneys at the pentagon?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: RubyGray

Remember how talking in absolutes makes you less credible?

You

He claimed that they were "pushing patients on gurneys". Gurneys are wheeled trolleys, which were not used that morning.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Then you doubled down?

originally posted by: RubyGray
a reply to: neutronflux

EVERYTHING I claim is on the videos, IS THERE.

Just you keep on ignoring it.

Rumsfeld did not push any patients down the road on tourneys.
He only carried backboard across the lawn.
Doctors, nurses and paramedics pushed tourneys down the highway on tourneys.
Anyone who watches the videos, can see this.

Found this Ruby Gray flicker page with this picture?

www.flickr.com...@N02/




After you rant of “ Gurneys are wheeled trolleys, which were not used that morning.” And “ Doctors, nurses and paramedics pushed tourneys down the highway on tourneys.
Anyone who watches the videos, can see this.”

Yet on a flicker page of a Ruby Gray had a picture of Rumsfeld at the large hole in the pentagon, not on any highway with a gurney at his feet.

You are blatantly dishonest, full of crap, and shamefully intellectually dishonest.

Sad to see you keep posting when you should gather what honor you have left and fade away. But just keep posting those CIT lies.