CNN airs story about the Mystery Jet over Washington on 911 today 12/1/07

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Boone is right. The runways would have to be turned about another 10 degrees to the right to be N/S. Andrews runway headings are 010/190 magnetic, which would put them at 360/180 true.

It doesn't change the point.

Boon is wrong about where O'Brien said he flew either way.

O'Brien says he was "passed the mall" headed "westbound" when he first interacted with the plane.

This make no sense whatsoever with the RADES data.

Even if you rotate the map you STILL would have to describe the RADES flight path as "south" and "west" but O'Brien said "north and west" with a "beautiful view of the mall".

He could not have been "passed the mall" headed "westbound" at his first interaction with the plane according to 84 RADES.

Impossible.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

This is irreconcilable with the RADES data as according to it he would have had his first interaction with the plane EAST of the mall (in other words he wouldn't have "passed it" yet since he was coming from the east) and traveling southwest (more south than west) far away from the mall.

Are we looking at the same RADES data? The one I'm looking at has blue and yellow thumbtacks with timestamps next to them.

If it is, then how do you interpret that O'Brien would have had any interaction with flight 77 on the east side of the mall? When you say mall, you do mean Washington National Mall with the Capitol and Washington Monument correct?

The flight paths of flight 77 and Gopher 06 didn't cross until the C-130 was on the west side of the Potomac River. O'Brien didn't see flight 77 until it had already made its right hand turn and was headed back north.

He was flying over DC dude.

This is what he describes.

You are right, he did fly over DC. According to the RADES data he flew over the southern tip.

Originally posted by Boone 870

The flight paths of flight 77 and Gopher 06 didn't cross until the C-130 was on the west side of the Potomac River. O'Brien didn't see flight 77 until it had already made its right hand turn and was headed back north.

Cross?

Why would they need to cross paths before he could see it?

"Our first sighting of the AA flight was just after we had gone by the mall westbound."

If he had a "beautiful view of the mall" even though he was traveling southwest and was miles away he sure would have a beautiful view of the plane right in front of him that was even closer.

But it doesn't matter because he specifically SAYS that he traveled northwest and the RADES data shows him traveling southwest.

It's really quite simple yet you insist on twisting his claim to make it fit with the official story when it doesn't.

Plus you ignore the fact that we have multiple other sources proving the RADES and NTSB data fraudulent anyway.

Keep spinning all you want Boone but you can't change the evidence.

You can't make northwest be southwest.

You can't make Colin Scoggins statements on the NORAD tapes go away.

You can't erase what Mineta said Monte Belger told him about where the plane flew.

You can't delete the 9:40 news report from ABC.

And you can't disappear the incredible witness testimony we have from the charter boat captain.

You can live in denial and spin but the hard evidence we provide makes infinitely more sense and speaks to the truth.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

You can live in denial and spin but the hard evidence we provide makes infinitely more sense and speaks to the truth.

Maybe it's so strong that you'll be starring in this new movie:

forums.randi.org...

Here is an image of the DC area with the map oriented north.

It shows the mall, Andrews Air Force Base, and the C-130's southernmost point over Washington, DC. I took two points from the radar data image you posted earlier and put a line between them. That line is represented with the color red. The white line is southwest and the blue line is west.

As you can see, his flight path was closer to west than it was to the southwest.

Originally posted by Boone 870


As you can see, his flight path was closer to west than it was to the southwest.

Yeah so?

He SAID northwest with a beautiful view of the mall.

Not southwest. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

He described his flight path and used the mall as a reference point. Not Alexandria.


If he had such a great view of the mall while he was not anywhere near it and flying in a different direction he would be able to see the plane even better since he was allegedly headed right towards it.

There is no way he would have missed the alleged impact either OR not be able to tell it was the Pentagon that was hit if you suggest he had "unlimited visibility" and such a great view of the mall.

You are ignoring his claims and trying to confuse the issue to fit the official story.

He does not describe flying southwest over Alexandria.

He describes flying northwest over DC and the mall.

This is 100% clear.

Stop deliberately confusing people by twisting his words.

"When we took off, we headed north and west and had a beautiful view of the Mall".

Our first sighting of the AA flight was just after we had gone by the mall westbound.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

He describes flying northwest over DC and the mall.

This is 100% clear.

Stop deliberately confusing people by twisting his words.

Whatever someone says is put into the entire pool of evidence. Much eyewitness testimony is confused but, in the end, the totality of the evidence sorts it all out.

There is no question that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 as the evidence from all sources demonstrates.

That is what is 100% clear, Craig.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

Yeah so?

Yeah so? You keep saying southwest and south.

He SAID northwest with a beautiful view of the mall.

Not southwest. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

He did not save Northwest. He said north and west. If he would have flown to the northwest, then he would have said northwest.

He described his flight path and used the mall as a reference point. Not Alexandria.

Don't you think most people would be able to recognize the mall and not Alexandria? It contains a lot of America's most recognizable landmarks and Alexandria is just another city around Washington, DC.

If he had such a great view of the mall while he was not anywhere near it and flying in a different direction he would be able to see the plane even better since he was allegedly headed right towards it.

I'll address this in a later post.

There is no way he would have missed the alleged impact either OR not be able to tell it was the Pentagon that was hit if you suggest he had "unlimited visibility" and such a great view of the mall.

He didn't see the explosion until after he had just passed the mall. He didn't see the explosion until after he turned back to the east.

He describes flying northwest over DC and the mall.

This is 100% clear.

Stop deliberately confusing people by twisting his words.

No he doesn't.

No it's not.

I'm not.

There is no question that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 as the evidence from all sources demonstrates.

Can I please have a list of all of these sources?From what I've read over the last year and a half regarding the Pentagon hit, there are plenty of questions.
Did I miss a news piece saying that AA77 was positively identified as the one crashing into the Pentagon?
I'd like to read the article on the positively identified engines belonging to that aircraft.Only one tire/wheel was found?Where are the rest of them?Landing gear?Serial numbers?Tail section?ID pieces with N644AA?Cock pit controls?Instrument panel?Flaps?Where are all the seats and luggage?How did the wings fold back and fit into that tiny hole?Where are the wings?No wiring harnesses?That plane must have been filled with miles of wires.

To say that there is no question(s) astounds me.

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

 

Yeah so?

Yeah so? You keep saying southwest and south.

Verrry good.

Because that is what the RADES data shows even though it is opposite of what O'Brien says which is exactly why they are irreconcilable.

Are you now denying that the RADES data depicts him as having traveled southwest?

Does southwest now mean something completely different to you just like the words north and west do?

He did not save Northwest. He said north and west. If he would have flown to the northwest, then he would have said northwest.

Then why don't you think he would have said southwest since the RADES data shows him flying southwest? Hmmmmmm?

North + west = northwest.

North + west does NOT = southwest.

Let me know when you are starting to get it.

Don't you think most people would be able to recognize the mall and not Alexandria? It contains a lot of America's most recognizable landmarks and Alexandria is just another city around Washington, DC.

He was describing where he flew. The amount of people who recognize landmarks where the RADES data says he DID NOT FLY is irrelevant.

He was describing where he flew which was north and west of Andrews on the south side of the mall. Not southwest of Andrews over Alexandria. You are so desperate to support the official story that you are willing to take his words, throw them away, and attribute them to the complete opposite meaning.

If he had such a great view of the mall while he was not anywhere near it and flying in a different direction he would be able to see the plane even better since he was allegedly headed right towards it.

I'll address this in a later post.

There is nothing to address because he didn't fly southwest.

He flew north and west which equals northwest when you add them together.

No he doesn't.

No it's not.

I'm not.

You can live in denial but that does not change the reality.

He says north and west.

Not southwest.

He says he flew by the mall and didn't see the plane until he passed it going westbound.

This is fact.

No amount of denial can change it.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


On the photo you have posted in the reply that I am replying to, you have O'Brien as saying, "The 30-45 degree bank I described was always in reference to the AA flight during its initial pass across our flight path when it turned from a northerly heading to a eastbound heading."

What if x marks the spot where O'Brien claims that he first became aware of flight 77?

That would clear up all the confusion about him seeing Flight 77 near the mall or on the east side of the Potomac River.

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT


Craig, did you look at the map I posted? The one where I oriented it north and plotted out the flight path?

The one that shows the actual flight path being closer to west than southwest?

North + West may equal Northwest.
North and west = north and west. Two different words, two different directions.

He was describing where he flew.

I know he was describing where he flew.

Somehow, you managed to translate south of the mall into over the mall.

Originally posted by Boone 870


Craig, did you look at the map I posted? The one where I oriented it north and plotted out the flight path?

The one that shows the actual flight path being closer to west than southwest?

It is still completely southwest while O'Brien says he traveled north and west which is opposite.

Are you denying that the RADES data has him traveling southwest?

North + West may equal Northwest.
North and west = north and west. Two different words, two different directions.

Either way this is what he SAID and if you follow those directions from Andrews you end up south side of the mall which is also what he said. One thing for sure if you put them together you do NOT end up on the RADES flight path hence proving a contradiction.

Let me know when you start to get it.

I know he was describing where he flew.

Somehow, you managed to translate south of the mall into over the mall.

I translate it to north and west to the south side of the mall and continuing westbound after he passed the mall.

Actually I am not translating anything.

This is exactly what he says.

I'd just like to throw in that this White Plane/CNN segment in Loose Change: Final Cut was really quite well done. I saw it at a packed screening in Minneapolis, and it was impressive how new and well-put together this part worked. A lot of fun to watch with lots of people, gasping at clips I'd seen months ago (the BBC-WTC7 among the most magnetizing).

They really took out some of the looser parts and replaced it with hard stuff from CNN on this topic and Able Danger. Makes sense to me, it's all part of Vigilant Guardian.

As Mineta said in the clip, Cheney was giving orders in the bunker. "The orders still stand?" Nothing to the contrary....

I don't know if there is any relevance, but over here in England, shortly after the news broke, I was listening to a Local BBC radio station and heard the story which I would have found hard to believe were it not on the BBC. After the news reader had stated that all commercial flights had now been grounded, A colleague made an interesting remark at the end of the news item, stating that there were still five aircraft in the air! At the time, I considered the possibility that a total of ten airliners must have been hi-jacked, that not being the case, what were the five aircraft doing that were repoted as still visible on the radar?
The five aircraft were not mentioned again on the main News half an hour later, is this in any way significant?
Horsegiver

Originally posted by citizen truth

There is no question that AA77 crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11 as the evidence from all sources demonstrates.

To say that there is no question(s) astounds me.

Presumably you have information that AA77 ended up somewhere else. Where? And what hit the Pentagon then?

Presumably you have information that AA77 ended up somewhere else. Where? And what hit the Pentagon then?

I can't prove AA77 did not hit the Pentagon anymore than you can prove it did.If I could prove it,I'd be rich or dead.
My reply was addressing your "no question".You may not have any questions but thousands do.There is no PROOF anywhere that verifies AA77 hit the building,not a shred.The EVIDENCE is poor, but no proof.
I have no idea where AA77 went.All the U.S. government would need to do is release the remaining 83 or 84 confiscated videos.
Thanks for not addressing my list of enquiries and not backing up your claim and showing "all sources".

Citizen Truth,

This sounds very existential.

If you claim "There is no PROOF anywhere that verifies AA77 hit the building, not a shred," then what steps would you take on your own to find out?

Then, why would you think videos would have any relevance if you believe no other evidence has any relevance whatsoever?

reply to post by jthomas

You've completely avoided my questions directed to you.I'm sorry but I don't play "chase my tail" to amuse you.
I've looked at plenty of photos,read many articles (both mainstream and alternative) and watched the one lame video the government released.The CITGO one is pointless since it shows nothing.There are videos in the government's hands and they won't release them.Why is my question.
See, I answered your question, yet you won't answer mine.
I'm not on here to do your homework.You share,I share.
Sooooo.........I'm still waiting for your sources that leave "no question AA77 hit the Pentagon."
If you can't answer my questions,with links( the burden of proof is yours), then I consider our conversation closed.
This thread is about the white plane so I won't derail it further.

Originally posted by citizen truth
reply to post by jthomas

 

You've completely avoided my questions directed to you.I'm sorry but I don't play "chase my tail" to amuse you.
I've looked at plenty of photos,read many articles (both mainstream and alternative) and watched the one lame video the government released.The CITGO one is pointless since it shows nothing.There are videos in the government's hands and they won't release them.Why is my question.
See, I answered your question, yet you won't answer mine.
I'm not on here to do your homework.You share,I share.
Sooooo.........I'm still waiting for your sources that leave "no question AA77 hit the Pentagon."
If you can't answer my questions,with links( the burden of proof is yours), then I consider our conversation closed.
This thread is about the white plane so I won't derail it further.

Citizen Truth,

There is no need to become so defensive. I am just trying to understand your contradictory statements. You appear confused about evidence.

So, let me get to the point. Contrary to what you claim, there are many ways to determine whether or not AA 77 hit the Pentagon or not.

It was established at the time of impact that a twin-engine passenger jet hit the Pentagon, verified within minutes by numerous reports from many individuals in different locations with no connection with each other. In addition, many of those witnesses to the crash correctly identified an American Airlines jet, and many with knowledge of aircraft correctly identified the jet as a Boeing 757. None of this is in dispute.

Prior to the crash, American Airlines Flight 77 was reported as "missing" in terms of the fact that its transponder signal was no longer being received. This is not in dispute.

Hundreds of firemen and rescue people from many different groups were on the scene within minutes and there was consistent presence of a large contingent of people on the scene from that point onwards, continuously. Once the fires were doused, teams of people were inside the Pentagon to begin the recovery effort. Those people removed wreckage, American Airlines seats with dead and burned bodies still strapped in them, 757 engines, wheels, the whole gamut of wreckage. Not one of those many hundreds of people reported anything different then those facts. None of these facts are in dispute.

So tell me who told you there is no "proof" that AA 77 hit the Pentagon? Why do you believe that person rather than those hundreds of people who were there?