*new presentation* Over The Navy Annex featuring Terry Morin

posted by pilgrum
So, if his account is accurate and allowing reasonable margin of error, the actual flight path is far closer to the 'official' version than the NOC proposal.

posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Absolutely 100% false.

This is because the "official version" requires the plane to be traveling 784 feet per second.

This means by the time he could react to the plane flying over-head, and then run 10 feet to get outside from between the wings to see the tail as he says he did, the plane would be completely invisible to him.

At the officially reported speed it would take about 2 seconds for the plane to descend to light pole #1.

But this isn't what he describes anyway. He describes it flying DIRECTLY over the top of him and the Navy Annex in BOTH accounts.

What is it about this simple aspect of the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY that the pseudoskeptics and naysayers cannot grasp? What kind of mental blocks are there in place which prevents them from visualizing the official south flight path from the Naval Annex? The official aircraft needed to descend down the hill and strike the #1 and #2 light poles with wings level; therefore it could not be above the Naval Annex.



This is what Terry Morin would have seen looking south from the Naval Annex, if the official Flight 77 south flight path through the light poles were true and actually happened as claimed. Morin would not have seen the aircraft above his head nor above the Naval Annex. That is just not possible. Morin could have turned and looked south, and seen the official aircraft, even from in between the building wings. But he did not did he; but instead looked up above him to see the aircraft above the Naval Annex roof.



In fact all of the multitude of Over the Naval Annex eyewitnesses would have seen the aircraft lower in the sky and to the south if the official flight path had actually occurred. But it did not, because all of the eyewitnesses placed it Over the Naval Annex.



Open your eyes people, if that is possible and visualize the different aspects of the two flight paths. The official south flight path is not possible.




[edit on 1/15/09 by SPreston]

Originally posted by SPreston

Open your eyes people, if that is possible and visualize the different aspects of the two flight paths. The official south flight path is not possible.

But the actual SoC flight path is the one AA77 flew to hit the Pentagon. Do you still deny that fact, SPreston?

posted by SPreston

Open your eyes people, if that is possible and visualize the different aspects of the two flight paths. The official south flight path is not possible.

posted by jthomas

But the actual SoC flight path is the one AA77 flew to hit the Pentagon. Do you still deny that fact, SPreston?

Fact? YOUR 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY is an illusion; a fantasy tale which never could have possibly happened, because the aircraft was actually witnessed Over the Naval Annex, 400 feet to the north of YOUR simulated and scripted official Flight 77 flight path through the light poles. Give it up jthomas; YOUR official south flight path has been proven a SCAM with not one proven living person having witnessed it. Even the rare witness you can dig up only saw the aircraft at roof level which alone disproves YOUR flight path through the light poles and low and level inches above the lawn. IMPOSSIBLE jthomas. You are defending a LIE.



See here? Instinctively even you know that jthomas. Come on man; face the facts and quit blindly defending a lie. Even you know those parking lot security videos and leaked stills were photoshopped, don't you jthomas? Look at what an excellent job you did photoshopping them, returning them to reality? Good job jthomas.




[edit on 1/15/09 by SPreston]

Originally posted by SPreston


Open your eyes people, if that is possible and visualize the different aspects of the two flight paths. The official south flight path is not possible.

posted by jthomas

But the actual SoC flight path is the one AA77 flew to hit the Pentagon. Do you still deny that fact, SPreston?

Fact? YOUR 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY is an illusion;

The evidence refutes your NoC flight path and your canard of your imaginary "official story."

a fantasy tale which never could have possibly happened, because the aircraft was actually witnessed Over the Naval Annex.

Actually, AA77 hit the Pentagon flying the confirmed SoC flight path. And you can't even provide a single eyewitness to your imaginary Pentagon "flyover."

I feel for you, good buddy.

reply to post by SPreston


But Terry said it was flying along side the Annex, which would make it parallel the the road alongside the Annex. This means the plane was flying alongside of it, flew over Terry and plowed into the Pentagon. his account puts another nail in the NoC theory as well. So why are you gys moving the goalpost and changing it from a fast bank NoC path (which is impossible for a 757 to do at that speed) and now its over the Annex from which it then does a magical high G bank north just past the Annex that nobody notices to squeak it north of the Citgo then magically banks in another high G turn microseconds before it flies into the fireball at the Pentagon and every single eyewitness completely misses the flyover and we still wait for somebody to say they saw the AA 757 fly over the Pentagon AFTER the fireball. Wow!

Originally posted by GenRadek

But Terry said it was flying along side the Annex, [...] This means the plane was flying alongside of it, flew over Terry and plowed into the Pentagon.

This is the part where you are clearly confused.

If the plane flew over directly over Terry and the Navy Annex as he described in detail in 2001 and confirmed in person in 2006 this proves it did NOT hit the building because this is irreconcilable with all official reports, data, and the physical damage.

Parallel or not.

The plane HAS to be completely on the south side of Columbia Pike for the official story to be true and this is simply not what Terry or any of the witnesses describe.

These are the facts that you can not deny which is why you keep blatantly refusing to answer these 5 questions:

1. Do you agree that Terry Morin specifically stated in 2001 that the plane was "right over the top" of him and the Navy Annex and that he specifically confirmed in 2008 that the fuselage of the plane was directly over him and the Navy Annex?

2. Do agree that Terry Morin specifically confirmed in 2008 that he was 10 feet in between the wings in front of the security shack in between the 4th and 5th wings when the fuselage of the plane flew over the top of him?

3. Do you understand how it is physically impossible to see the side of an aircraft when the fuselage is only about 100 feet directly above you as he describes?

4. Do you understand how a plane directly over the Navy Annex is corroborated by many other witnesses and how this simple fact fatally contradicts all official reports, data, and the physical damage?

5. Do you agree that in 2008 Terry Morin stated he was interviewed by the FBI 3 times but was unable to tell the authorities it was an AA jet because he only saw the belly and that he also cited this explanation as the reason why he misidentified the aircraft as a 737?

posted by GenRadek

But Terry said it was flying along side the Annex, which would make it parallel the the road alongside the Annex. This means the plane was flying alongside of it, flew over Terry and plowed into the Pentagon. his account puts another nail in the NoC theory as well. So why are you gys moving the goalpost and changing it from a fast bank NoC path (which is impossible for a 757 to do at that speed) and now its over the Annex from which it then does a magical high G bank north just past the Annex that nobody notices to squeak it north of the Citgo then magically banks in another high G turn microseconds before it flies into the fireball at the Pentagon and every single eyewitness completely misses the flyover and we still wait for somebody to say they saw the AA 757 fly over the Pentagon AFTER the fireball. Wow!

Would you mind producing the quotation with Terry Morin stating the aircraft 'was flying along side the Annex'? Making up a quotation does not count. Besides the aircraft would have to be 400 feet south of where Morin was standing to fit the official flight path in the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY; not exactly 'was flying along side the Annex' would it be?

How are you going to account for the dive down the hill and the downed light poles and the high G pullup and the level flight inches above the lawn? You can't and your silly fantasy tale is dead dead dead.



[edit on 1/16/09 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


From 2001:

The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB).

Now he was still outside the Annex gap.
now where does that put it?

Now the recent one:

I was right at the edge of being on the outer portion. When the plane went right over the top of me I was within 10 feet of the edge of the Navy Annex. I was inside, it flew over the top of me, it's right on the edge and I'm right here, and because I had already heard about the Twin Towers, I immediately ran to the outside and that's when I watched the airplane, and I moved into a position where I could see it.

So if the plane flew over him so fast and all, and it flew farther north, how did Terry manage to watch the plane go all the way down and into the Pentagon? Did he say he ran across the Columbia Pike to get a better view? That doesn't make much sense. It appears his account correctly puts it on track to hit the lamposts and Pentagon. And if you are still going to claim otherwise, start providing us with flyover witnesses so we can take your inital claim seriously. Because so far you have a theory that ends up crashing into the Pentagon (ergo debunking your thoery). In order for your theory to work you need the flyover. But there isnt. So this casts doubt on your theory as well.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by SPreston

 

From 2001:

The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB).

Now he was still outside the Annex gap.
now where does that put it?

Now the recent one:

I was right at the edge of being on the outer portion. When the plane went right over the top of me I was within 10 feet of the edge of the Navy Annex. I was inside, it flew over the top of me, it's right on the edge and I'm right here, and because I had already heard about the Twin Towers, I immediately ran to the outside and that's when I watched the airplane, and I moved into a position where I could see it.

So you admit he says it flew right over the top of him!

Perfect.

That proves 9/11 was an inside job.

Glad to have you now fighting for 9/11 truth.

So if the plane flew over him so fast and all, and it flew farther north, how did Terry manage to watch the plane go all the way down and into the Pentagon?

As explained numerous times, he ONLY could have seen the tail if the official speed and flight path are FALSE.

He ONLY could have seen the tail if the plane was not low and level with the ground as required by all the physical damage and shown in the security video.


I'm glad to see you are finally starting to understand.

Now please answer my 5 questions:

1. Do you agree that Terry Morin specifically stated in 2001 that the plane was "right over the top" of him and the Navy Annex and that he specifically confirmed in 2008 that the fuselage of the plane was directly over him and the Navy Annex?

2. Do agree that Terry Morin specifically confirmed in 2008 that he was 10 feet in between the wings in front of the security shack in between the 4th and 5th wings when the fuselage of the plane flew over the top of him?

3. Do you understand how it is physically impossible to see the side of an aircraft when the fuselage is only about 100 feet directly above you as he describes?

4. Do you understand how a plane directly over the Navy Annex is corroborated by many other witnesses and how this simple fact fatally contradicts all official reports, data, and the physical damage?

5. Do you agree that in 2008 Terry Morin stated he was interviewed by the FBI 3 times but was unable to tell the authorities it was an AA jet because he only saw the belly and that he also cited this explanation as the reason why he misidentified the aircraft as a 737?

posted by SPreston
Fact? YOUR 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY is an illusion;

posted by jthomas
The evidence refutes your NoC flight path and your canard of your imaginary "official story."

posted by SPreston
a fantasy tale which never could have possibly happened, because the aircraft was actually witnessed Over the Naval Annex.

It is YOUR 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY which you are constantly defending jthomas. I am just calling it like it is; irrevocably extinct. You are just uselessly beating your head against a wall. Your silly south flight path is dead dead dead. YOUR far-fetched fairy tale cannot possibly survive burial in the quicksand foundation it was built upon. Why don't you come back from your fantasy world and join the real world, 'good buddy'?



[edit on 1/16/09 by SPreston]

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

So you admit he says it flew right over the top of him!

Perfect.

That proves 9/11 was an inside job.

Glad to have you now fighting for 9/11 truth.

First off Craig, what is the wingspan of the 757? Think about that first. Then think, what does "right over top of me" mean in relation to the plane? Was it a wingtip that flew over him? Fuselage? Engine? Wingroot? He wasn't very specific. Also you ignore AGAIN he saw the red stripes on the AA in 2001, so STOP cherry picking the account when you see fit. According to you how can it "fly right over him" and he still sees the red stripes?

I'm glad to see you are finally starting to understand.

Now please answer my 5 questions:

1. Do you agree that Terry Morin specifically stated in 2001 that the plane was "right over the top" of him and the Navy Annex and that he specifically confirmed in 2008 that the fuselage of the plane was directly over him and the Navy Annex?

Do you agree that Terry Morin stated seeing the red stripes in 2001 and seeing the impact into the Pentagon?

2. Do agree that Terry Morin specifically confirmed in 2008 that he was 10 feet in between the wings in front of the security shack in between the 4th and 5th wings when the fuselage of the plane flew over the top of him?

Do you agree in 2001 he was 10ft OUT from the gap? Which recollection is better and fresher? one made immediately after or 7 whole years later?

3. Do you understand how it is physically impossible to see the side of an aircraft when the fuselage is only about 100 feet directly above you as he describes?

False. I posted two photos of an AA plane directly over the photographer even lower and the red stripes were visible. Also he mentioned seeing it in 2001. Plus for you, this would mean the plane never banked anywhere and flew straight into the Pentagon.

4. Do you understand how a plane directly over the Navy Annex is corroborated by many other witnesses and how this simple fact fatally contradicts all official reports, data, and the physical damage?

Do you understand the term "relative perspective"? When a witness sees something flying "over" something else, is the aircraft really "over" the object, or is it actually behind or in front of the object in relation to the observer? I am surprised you didn't even bother to think of this. How can someone from less than a mile away tell if an aircraft is 10-50 ft in front of or behind an object and therefore flying over it, or not? Perspective perspective perspective. If you are having a hard time understanding let this visual help:



Now, if I were to show this to you, would you say the plane is flying over the hotel from your perspective?



did these jets fly over the Statue of Liberty?

5. Do you agree that in 2008 Terry Morin stated he was interviewed by the FBI 3 times but was unable to tell the authorities it was an AA jet because he only saw the belly and that he also cited this explanation as the reason why he misidentified the aircraft as a 737?

So in 2001 he was completely mistaken about seeing the red stripes? even though he states them? And how can you mis-ID a 737 from a 757 especially if its right over you?

Originally posted by SPreston

Your silly south flight path is dead dead dead.

As always, you are totally confused, SPreston. It's not my south flight path - it's AA77's confirmed flight path into the Pentagon.

Sheesshhhh.....

reply to post by GenRadek


Right on the money again

There's no getting away from the fact that Terry's location only gave him a view of a SOC approach and the position of those impacted light poles is very close to the northern limit of his field of view, as is the impact point at the Pentagon. He specifically stated he observed the plane descend below the tree line.

Relative perspective potentially explains all of this NOC theory when considered along with 7 year old recollections. I also looked into the angle of the sun in the morning sky for that time of day, season and latitude which indicates the shadow of an aircraft travelling on the bearing of AA77 (pick whatever you like but it was generally towards the ENE) would cast its shadow approximately twice its altitude in a NW direction which makes it very possible for the shadow of the aircraft to have crossed the ground a little north of CITGO.

IE for 100' altitude, the shadow would appear on the ground some 200' to the NW.

Did the NOC witnesses confuse the shadow location along with the perspective problem?
They only had a few seconds to observe this entire event after all.

posted by Pilgrum
reply to post by GenRadek

 

Right on the money again

There's no getting away from the fact that Terry's location only gave him a view of a SOC approach and the position of those impacted light poles is very close to the northern limit of his field of view, as is the impact point at the Pentagon. He specifically stated he observed the plane descend below the tree line.

Come on you deniers and liars and OFFICIAL STORY suppliers. Is this what Terry Morin saw from the Naval Annex?

To the south view


If Morin saw the official Flight 77 aircraft following the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY flight path, then this is exactly what Terry Morin should have seen, isn't it? Does this look like over his head or Over any part of the Naval Annex?? Of course not. Nobody saw this to the south view of the Pentagon aircraft did they? Not Edward Paik, not Terry Morin, not any of the ANC eyewitnesses, not Sgt Lagasse, nobody.



But even so, the official aircraft was supposed to be flying at 535 mph (784 fps) and Morin would have had about 2 seconds before it disappeared out of sight below the hill in order to hit the #1 and #2 light poles, and about 4.5 total seconds before the explosion near the Pentagon wall. Morin heard it approaching and did not see it until it passed over his head between the wings. How would the NA building wings be blocking sight of the official aircraft from Morin's view on the south official flight path? That is not much time (2 seconds) to turn your head or turn around or do much of anything is it? So how did Morin see the tail dip to the right in a right bank in the 4.5 seconds he would have had before the explosion (2 seconds total if it flew down the hill), and where in the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY does the official Flight 77 aircraft bank to the right?



And how are you deniers and liars and OFFICIAL STORY suppliers going to write off the 20+ other eyewitnesses also placing the aircraft Over the Naval Annex and about 400 feet north of the official south flight path, rendering successfully hitting the #1 and #2 light poles with wings level totally impossible?



And many of those 20+ eyewitnesses of the aircraft Over the Naval Annex also report a bank to the right, supporting Morin's account of a bank to the right and denying the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY flight path with NO bank to the right.



[edit on 1/17/09 by SPreston]

How long are you going to deny that AA77 hit the Pentagon, SPreston?

How long are you going to deny that AA77 hit the Pentagon, SPreston?

posted by jthomas
How long are you going to deny that AA77 hit the Pentagon, SPreston?

posted by jthomas
How long are you going to deny that AA77 hit the Pentagon, SPreston?

Forever, because it did not. Did you have to ask the question twice to convince yourself jthomas?

AA77 was not even in Virginia. The aircraft which took its place was proven Over the Naval Annex by 20+ real living eyewitnesses, most of whom were interviewed way back in 2001 and reinterviewed in 2008 and earlier.

jthomas YOUR pathetic 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY is dead dead dead and no aircraft hit the Pentagon.

reply to post by SPreston


Who said anything it was THAT far away? Not us, none of us. Not Terry. Where did you pull that magic rabbit out of?

South of Citgo also puts it alongside the Navy Annex. You can argue the semantics all you want about just how close it was, but the original lineup puts it just north of the expressway and just on the south edge of the Annex with a possible overlap of its wingspan over the Annex. What are the dimensions of the 757? Is this so hard to get? And this line up follows it straight into the Pentagon and that is why 8 whole years later, not a single soul ever mentions a 757 flying OVER the Pentagon immediately after the fireball, nor does it mention ANY 757s doing a crazy ass stunt pilot high-G turn and climb up and over and away from the Pentagon. Nor are there any eyewitnesses that mention any extra 757s taking the place of the original 757 ANYWHERE prior to the impact. So now your NoC is changed to the ONA, correct? Or does the ONA somehow fits into the NoC flight path, then it all turns into a FLOP (FLight Over Pentagon)? Well, at least the last acronym correctly labels the theory.

Your whole "theory" is based on distortions of eyewitness accounts, faulty accounts, AND the complete LACK of something called "relative perception" which would explain why some people from a distance away saw it "fly over" the Annex. Geeze, with all that "investigative brainpower" at the CIT HQs, you'd think one of them would have thought, or at least considered the perspective of the eyewitnesses in the accounts and investigated more into what could have caused the differing accounts.

And in Terry's account, he watches the whole thing unfold right before his eyes and even sees the impact, in both accounts. So you have a dilemma. Are you going to use Terry's account to support your theory, or are you going to step aside and acknowledge the fact that Terry's account puts it in a SoC path for him to be able to witness what he saw, and admit you have no clue how to interpret eyewitness accounts nor how to correctly deduce what they saw?

[edit on 1/17/2009 by GenRadek]

reply to post by SPreston


And all of your "witnesses" all saw the impact or explosion or both. Oops oops ooops!

I can see why over at the JREF forums they are having a riot taking apart your "theory".

posted by GenRadek
reply to post by SPreston

 

Who said anything it was THAT far away? Not us, none of us. Not Terry. Where did you pull that magic rabbit out of?

Because that is exactly where the official flight path of Flight 77 is supposed to be in relation to the Naval Annex, contained in the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY. That photo of a 757 above, would be in the lower left hand corner of the diagram below on that red line, just prior to allegedly diving down the hill to the #1 and #2 light poles; actually a bit further west out of the diagram and opposite the 4th and 5th wings of the building. That is wings 7 and 8 of the NA in view. Sheesh. Two seconds at 535 mph (784 fps) to get to the Lloyde was here dot. The aircraft has to hit the #1 and #2 light poles with wings level or miss one of the light poles or even hit the bridge with a wing tip. Over the Naval Annex or North of Columbia Pike renders this totally impossible. The aircraft cannot possibly make two quick banks in two seconds.



How can you be so ignorant? Don't you even know YOUR own official flight path? You do see that the official flight path was south of Columbia Pike and south of the Naval Annex and south of the VDOT tower, don't you? About 400 feet south of the Naval Annex just like I wrote previously. Sheesh, this is like teaching little tiny pre-schoolers; these guys don't even know what they are defending.






[edit on 1/17/09 by SPreston]