Pentagon witness states they did not see what hit, were told later was a 757

I don't understand something about this "witness" and maybe you folks can explain it to me.

The "witness" claims he does not know "what" hit the Pentagon but was later told it was a plane.

I'm curious as how this person could be classified as a "witness"? I even looked up the definition of "witness" here is what I found:

1. to see, hear, or know by personal presence and perception: to witness an accident.
2. to be present at (an occurrence) as a formal witness, spectator, bystander, etc.: She witnessed our wedding.
3. to bear witness to; testify to; give or afford evidence of.
4. to attest by one's signature: He witnessed her will.
–verb (used without object) 5. to bear witness; testify; give or afford evidence.
–noun 6. an individual who, being present, personally sees or perceives a thing; a beholder, spectator, or eyewitness.


ALL THESE DEFINITIONS have something in common - to be a witness one must actually "see" something.

How can this person be a witness when he didn't see anything?

Except that the link you source erroneously cites people like the renovation manager Lee Evey who wasn't a witness to the event at all.

Mark Robert's claim that "103 saw the plane hit the Pentagon" is patently false and this has been proven and acknowledged by Mark Robert's own colleagues over at jref.

Furthermore his claim that "15 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees" is a deliberate lie as I have fully demonstrated here.

You have cited an inaccurate proven disinfo piece.

Originally posted by ProfTom
The "witness" claims he does not know "what" hit the Pentagon but was later told it was a plane.

I'm curious as how this person could be classified as a "witness"? I even looked up the definition of "witness" here is what I found:

How can this person be a witness when he didn't see anything?

Well he is on this list of Pentagon witnesses.

www.geocities.com...

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT


Except that the link you source erroneously cites people like the renovation manager Lee Evey who wasn't a witness to the event at all.

Mark Robert's claim that "103 saw the plane hit the Pentagon" is patently false and this has been proven and acknowledged by Mark Robert's own colleagues over at jref.

Furthermore his claim that "15 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees" is a deliberate lie as I have fully demonstrated here.

You have cited an inaccurate proven disinfo piece.

Hmmm.

What Mark Roberts has done is simply compile a list of witnesses quoted by other sources. Certainly witnesses saw the plane hit as well as knock down the light poles. That has never been in question.

The eyewitness reports are just one line of evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at high speed and those reports are consistent with all of the other evidence.

I am not sure why you would believe otherwise since no evidence has ever surfaced that would lead one to question the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Originally posted by jthomas
The eyewitness reports are just one line of evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at high speed and those reports are consistent with all of the other evidence.

The witnesses statements would not hold up in court. They could not agree on what type of plane it was, and as stated some were told later it was a 757.

What other evidence? Do you have any real evidence of Flgiht 77 hitting the Pentagon?

Do you have any actual videos or photos of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon?

Do you have any official reports matching the parts found to Flight 77?

To end this whole thing about whether or not a plane hit the pentagon just ask our beloved gov't to release the "classified" footage they took within minutes after the attack from all the surrounding buildings ? THAT alone will put the whole NO PLANE theory striking the pentagon, to rest, OR it will Show SOMETHING ELSE ?!?!??

Mod Note: Please Do Not Evade The Automatic Censors -- Please Review

[edit on 9-11-2007 by chissler]

Originally posted by jthomas


Hmmm.

What Mark Roberts has done is simply compile a list of witnesses quoted by other sources. Certainly witnesses saw the plane hit as well as knock down the light poles. That has never been in question.

It most certainly is in question. The mainstream media reports are not accurate and Robert's compilation of them is even less so.

As I maintain........NOBODY saw the light poles get hit and the one witness who says she did was simply deducing or embellishing.

Just because someone mentions the light poles on the ground it does not mean they saw the plane hit them.

Same with the fact that just because someone saw the plane and heard the explosion it does not mean they saw it hit the building.

The eyewitness reports are just one line of evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at high speed and those reports are consistent with all of the other evidence.


I am not sure why you would believe otherwise since no evidence has ever surfaced that would lead one to question the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

Yes there is and I have found it and brought it back for the world.

We have proven a military deception on 9/11 in Arlington.

I suggest you click on the link in my signature and view this evidence that you are unfamiliar with.

Originally posted by xxghostsxx
To end this whole thing about whether or not a plane hit the pentagon just ask our beloved gov't to release the "classified" footage they took within minutes after the attack from all the surrounding buildings ? THAT alone will put the whole NO PLANE theory striking the pentagon, to rest, OR it will Show SOMETHING ELSE ?!?!??

But that is kind of hard when the FBI and other agencies deny FOIA requests to release the information.


mod edit: edited quoted censor circumvention

[edit on 9-11-2007 by chissler]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jthomas
The eyewitness reports are just one line of evidence that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at high speed and those reports are consistent with all of the other evidence.

The witnesses statements would not hold up in court. They could not agree on what type of plane it was, and as stated some were told later it was a 757.

What other evidence? Do you have any real evidence of Flgiht 77 hitting the Pentagon?

Do you have any actual videos or photos of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon?

Do you have any official reports matching the parts found to Flight 77?

Witnesses to events have no reason to have to go to court.

Certainly, it is not expected that most people are good at identifying what type of aircraft actually hit the Pentagon. Some of the witnesses just knew a large plane hit it. Some knew an aircraft with two engines and American Airlines painted on its side hit the Pentagon. Many who like me can identify aircraft knew it was an American Airlines Boeing 757.

Or so they say.

Now you ask me if "I" have any evidence or videos that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. I can categorically state that I have no videos in my possession. I can also state that I have seen no videos of an actual 757 hitting the Pentagon.

Do I have evidence? Not in my possession. I am in the exact same position as you and everyone else in this matter. Each of us is presented with evidence and claims that we have to evaluate even though we do not get to hold anything in our hands, see it in person, nor were we there on the scene to investigate the matter ourselves. We depend on information from other sources, a multitude of different sources, often with conflicting information. Is this not true?

Now that you and I are operating from the exact same position, the very same starting point, let's you an I investigate this together and see if we can arrive at an answer. With what you and I know - or think we know - how would you suggest we approach this problem?

Where should we start to know if a 757 hit the Pentagon or not? Where would you start Ultima?

The plane hit in broad daylight. The radar tracks head straight to
the pentagon. There is no conspiracy.......just jihad terrorists killing
americans. Change course back to global warming.

Originally posted by jthomas
Where should we start to know if a 757 hit the Pentagon or not? Where would you start Ultima?

Well i do not know about you but i have filed FOIA request with the FBI and the NTSB. I have been researching what happened on 9/11 using professional and government research sites.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jthomas
Where should we start to know if a 757 hit the Pentagon or not? Where would you start Ultima?

Well i do not know about you but i have filed FOIA request with the FBI and the NTSB. I have been researching what happened on 9/11 using professional and government research sites.

Good. We also have a missing Boeing 757, missing passengers, bodies, wreckage, eyewitnesses both before and after the event, a blown-up portion of the Pentagon... lots of information available to us all from the moment of the event, in the public domain. Do you think we can conclude that American Airlines flight 77 hit the Pentagon with all that information already available to us?

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Just because someone mentions the light poles on the ground it does not mean they saw the plane hit them.

Why were light poles on the ground? Even if were true that no one saw a plane hit them, how would you go about determining what happened to the light poles?

Same with the fact that just because someone saw the plane and heard the explosion it does not mean they saw it hit the building.

But people reported seeing it hit the Pentagon. Even if no one saw it hit the Pentagon, how would you go about determining what happened?

Originally posted by jthomas
Good. We also have a missing Boeing 757, missing passengers, bodies, wreckage, eyewitnesses both before and after the event, a blown-up portion of the Pentagon... lots of information available to us all from the moment of the event, in the public domain. Do you think we can conclude that American Airlines flight 77 hit the Pentagon with all that information already available to us?

1. The 757 is not missing. The FAA registry list that 757 as being destroyed. Where and when it was destroyed we do not have that information.

2. The bodies were identified (even though they did not have DNA testing back then for testing DNA that had been destroyed by heat), all but 5 bodies.

3. As stated the eyewitness statements are not really that good due to the fact that they could not agree on what they saw and some stating they were told later it was a 757. They would not hold up in court if they were called upon to testify.

4. We have no official reports that match the parts and wreckage to Flight 77.

5. The FBI still will not release the majority of videos from the security and CCTV cameras on the Pentagon and from the nearby buildings.

So with all the missing information we cannot say with 100% fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.


[edit on 9-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by jthomas


On site investigation.

Interviewing witnesses, plotting POV's, surveying the topography, scouring for images, and uncovering contradictions and lies.

This is what we have done.

The plane was not in the proper place to line up with the physical damage so the damage had to have been caused some other way.

This has been proven.

It was a military deception designed to fool people with a low flying airplane timed perfectly with the explosion that continued on over the Potomac river concealed by the fireball and smoke plume and ultimately blended as if it were a departure out of Reagan.

Click on the link in my signature to view the evidence that proves it.



[edit on 9-11-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]

It also seems kind of strange why the FBI only spent 5 days on the crime scene after stating it would taek 30 days to complete the crime scene.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jthomas
Good. We also have a missing Boeing 757, missing passengers, bodies, wreckage, eyewitnesses both before and after the event, a blown-up portion of the Pentagon... lots of information available to us all from the moment of the event, in the public domain. Do you think we can conclude that American Airlines flight 77 hit the Pentagon with all that information already available to us?

1. The 757 is not missing. The FAA registry list that 757 as being destroyed. Where and when it was destroyed we do not have that information.

I agree that Flight 77 is not missing, but Craig Ranke thinks it is missing.

2. The bodies were identified (even though they did not have DNA testing back then for testing DNA that had been destroyed by heat), all but 5 bodies.

So how would you go about identifying them?

3. As stated the eyewitness statements are not really that good due to the fact that they could not agree on what they saw and some stating they were told later it was a 757. They would not hold up in court if they were called upon to testify.

As I mentioned before it is not necessary to identify the plane as a Boeing 757. The majority of witnesses identified a large passenger airliner as what they saw. If there were ever some reason the eyewitnesses would have to appear in court (I can't think why they would) the jury would weigh their testimony along with all of the other evidence. Since so many people describe essentially the same thing from so many different locations, I believe the probability is very high that their testimony would be deemed credible by a jury.

4. We have no official reports that match the parts and wreckage to Flight 77.

That's kind of irrelevant since I have a feeling you don't believe "official reports". Since we are talking about what information is available to us already, it makes it irrelevant whether there is any "official reports" anyway. So, back to the question: do you think we can conclude that American Airlines flight 77 hit the Pentagon with all that information already available to us?

5. The FBI still will not release the majority of videos from the security and CCTV cameras on the Pentagon and from the nearby buildings.

In you investigation of identifying the wreckage, do you think you would need to have videos?

So with all the missing information we cannot say with 100% fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

The question concerns what information is already available to us, not what may or may not be available to us. That raises the question if you are unaware of information that is already available.

To start, I would think you are probably unaware of this site that has been up for many years:

911research.wtc7.net...

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

It was a military deception designed to fool people with a low flying airplane timed perfectly with the explosion that continued on over the Potomac river concealed by the fireball and smoke plume and ultimately blended as if it were a departure out of Reagan.

That is just speculation that requires you to explain what happened to Flight 77.

Click on the link in my signature to view the evidence that proves it.

You haven't begun to explain what happened to Flight 77 and why there are no reports of an passenger jet flying away from the Pentagon.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

So back to the question. How many more witnesses were told afterwords it was a 757 ?

Since that was announced over the news within the first 5 minutes of the event the answer would have to be virtually all of them.

That's incorrect. It was two hours, not 5 minutes.

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

It was a military deception designed to fool people with a low flying airplane timed perfectly with the explosion that continued on over the Potomac river concealed by the fireball and smoke plume and ultimately blended as if it were a departure out of Reagan.

That is just speculation that requires you to explain what happened to Flight 77.

The fact that you refuse to view the evidence that proves my assertion does not mean the evidence doesn't exist. This is NOT based on speculation at all.

Plus it is not my responsibility to prove what happened to the original plane and not being able to do so does not cancel out the evidence proving it didn't hit the building.

To suggest that it does is a logical fallacy.

Click on the link in my signature to view the evidence that proves it.

You haven't begun to explain what happened to Flight 77 and why there are no reports of an passenger jet flying away from the Pentagon.

It is not my responsibility to prove what happened to the original plane and not being able to do so does not cancel out the evidence proving it didn't hit the building.

To suggest that it does is a logical fallacy.


There are reports of a so called "2nd" plane and/jet flying away from the Pentagon after the explosion. Evidence and explanation here.

There are also reports of a jet circling the helipad area at the time of the attack.

The media reporting on that day was abominable and their investigative follow up has been non-existent.

If you think that the media reported everything and what all witnesses saw you are fooling yourself.

We have proven otherwise.

More evidence here.

The 911 calls and transcripts were confiscated and permanently sequestered for a reason.

Because of this we will NEVER know what people initially reported.