It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Reheat
Originally posted by Reheat
No one wants to refute the video and photographic proof that the 84th RADES data is correct.
"Our first sighting of the AA flight was just after we had gone by the mall westbound."
-Lt. Col Steve O'Brien
"I distinctly remember having a difficult time keeping the AA flight in sight after we turned back to the east to follow it per a request from Wash. Departure Control. When I saw the initial explosion I was not able to see exactly where or what it had impacted, but remember trying to approximate a position to give to ATC."
-Lt. Col Steve O'Brien
Originally posted by Reheat
Isn't this a nice photo of a C-130 flying through some smoke?
Scott Cook: "Directly in back of the plume, which would place it almost due west from our office, a four-engine propeller plane, which Ray later said resembled a C-130, started a steep decent towards the Pentagon. It was coming from an odd direction (planes don’t go east-west in the area), and it was descending at a much steeper angle than most aircraft. Trailing a thin, diffuse black trail from its engines, the plane reached the Pentagon at a low altitude and made a sharp left turn, passing just north of the plume, and headed straight for the White House.
All the while, I was sort of talking at it: "Who the hell are you? Where are you going? You’re not headed for downtown!" Ray and Verle watched it with me, and I was convinced it was another attack. But right over the tidal basin, at an altitude of less than 1000 feet, it made another sharp left turn to the north and climbed rapidly. Soon it was gone, leaving only the thin black trail."
Directly in back of the plume, which would place it almost due west from our office
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Your blanket denial of the facts does not refute them.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
All of the ANC workers saw it approach from the northwest, not southwest.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
This is EXACTLY where O'Brien describes himself as having come from...
"Our first sighting of the AA flight was just after we had gone by the mall westbound." -Lt. Col Steve O'Brien
Nothing was "distorted". It is what he says.[/qoute]
Your tactic is not cute or endearing. This is exactly why you're a FRAUD. It's the position you place the aircraft nearly on top of the Mall that is the distortion. If he was where you place the aircraft he could not have seen the Mall as he could have been trying to looking through the bottom of the aircraft. He can't see directly below him, particularly on the right side of the aircraft. It is quite obvious that he was further south of the Mall as the RADES data depicted, but indeed still south of the Mall..
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Just like he says that he was so far away when he first saw the explosion that he could not even tell it came from the Pentagon!
"I distinctly remember having a difficult time keeping the AA flight in sight after we turned back to the east to follow it per a request from Wash. Departure Control. When I saw the initial explosion I was not able to see exactly where or what it had impacted, but remember trying to approximate a position to give to ATC."
-Lt. Col Steve O'Brien
Do you really think if the RADES data were true he wouldn't be able to tell that the explosion was coming from the Pentagon??
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Get real with yourself for once reheat.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
You can't provide a single example of anything being "distorted" yet you have no problem spouting off this lie anyway.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Support your claims reheat.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
We provide evidence and you provide none.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
The Tribby video has nothing to do with the approach since it was taken minutes AFTER the explosion.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Your desperation is showing.
Originally posted by Reheat
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Your blanket denial of the facts does not refute them.
I don't refute the ANC people, but the Tribby video and the Looney Photographs do.
Is it now? Pssssst - You're going to feel really, really bad to have wasted all of the time and money you've spent on this, not to mention the embarrassment of having wasted 2 years of your life.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Besides who would believe a person that uses the British term for afterburner as a name.
Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Maybe just maybe....he's British?
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Originally posted by Reheat
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Your blanket denial of the facts does not refute them.
I don't refute the ANC people, but the Tribby video and the Looney Photographs do.
No they don't.
They could not possibly do this because....
1. They are not conclusive as to EXACT location in relation to the ground.
2. They were taken minutes AFTER the explosion and therefore have nothing to do with the approach of the craft PRIOR to the explosion which is where evidence proves a fatal contradiction with the RADES data.
Is it now? Pssssst - You're going to feel really, really bad to have wasted all of the time and money you've spent on this, not to mention the embarrassment of having wasted 2 years of your life.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Blah, Blah, Blah.....
Originally posted by Reheat
Got a Court Date yet?
Originally posted by Reheat
.
I'm certainly not going to continue to get into a pissing match about what the video and the photograph show. But, if you continue to deny they PROVE your crap wrong, I'm going to have to resort to calling you a LIAR.