*new presentation* Over The Navy Annex featuring Terry Morin

reply to post by LaBTop


Firstly, thanks for posting that excellent quality picture which I'm guessing is part of the latest FOIA release.

I can see that the overhead mains are still there so they were not actually 'taken out' by a plane, nor were those poles impacted which would have been an amazing feat for a 125' wingspan aircraft low enough to contact the wires. I can tell from the overhead construction there that the highest span of conductors is actually high voltage in the 6-11kV range (rough estimate) and the pole on the left is a 'ug/oh' or underground to overhead connection point for high voltage mains. In light of the mains in question being a HV distribution feeder I revise my height estimate to approx 8m above ground level (the top cross-arm on the pole). What this would mean is that any sort of impact or major disturbance of those conductors would cause them to clash together triggering the feeder overcurrent protection and blacking out a considerable area, not just the CITGO gas station. There would also have been a huge blinding flash.

In line with the above observation, is there any report of loss of electrical supply in the area? I note particularly that the CITGO security cameras continued recording throughout the event with no interruption. You mentioned the telephone service possibly being interrupted which could have been the result of loss of supply to a PABX but did the CITGO suffer a total blackout? not to mention everyone else supplied by that HV feeder.

Considering the recent arguments re G forces, the manouver required to clear the Navy Annex roof then descend to the height of those conductors looks 'undoable' to me even without extending it to clearing trees further on then pulling up sufficiently to clear the Pentagon roof as suggested by the current NOC theory.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic, just looking at everything as presented.

I'd have thought CIT & Co would be all over this particular aspect because evidence of the plane actually contacting the mains in that location would be the first piece of physical evidence supporting the NOC theory. So far there's nothing in the way of tangible physical evidence for the NOC theory and they're relegated to attempting to negate all the actual physical evidence which happens to be not where they want it to be, unsuccessfully in my opinion.

I noted your question re the apparent lack of smoke in the pic of the recently collapsed section of the Pentagon. I believe it's answered by the latest post of the overhead view which shows the wind direction Abundant smoke is present over the roof - blowing toward the south-east, away from the camera position in the first pic.


[edit on 8/2/2009 by Pilgrum]

Pilgrum, regarding your eventual "huge blinding flash", consider the Terry Morin report again, where he mentions exactly that, but from his view point high on the hill, it looked like a simple flash.
See one of my earlier posts with a transcript in it, where he mentioned the flash somewhere in the area where the lines are.
Could it have been a breaker flash? I agree, it looks like the power in the Citgo video is not interrupted, but could that breaker interrupt power at the Cemetery grounds? Who knows?
It seems that the lines went underground under that road, Columbia Pike's extension around the Citgo station, and came up again on the Cemetery side pole, where the lines followed that small road along the fence of the Arlington Cemetery.
It will be interesting to study available HD 9/11 pictures from Google Earth or better sources, to see if those lines definitely went underground.
If not, then those lines were severed, since they are not there, between those two poles on each side of Columbia Pike's extension to the South Parking lot of the Pentagon.

Here is the original page link to John Farmers FOIA photos, I thought he had all his pages and in fact his whole site down, like he announced in December 2008, however, it's all back up again, so here are the original links :

The original FOIA pictures page at John Farmers site, those pictures were obtained from the US Army Center for Military History and the Fairfax County Police Department :
aal77.com...

The telephone and power lines poles photo :
aal77.com...

The by me named as last cut (in fact the first cut according to the SoC theory) light pole laying in the grass just a bit left and up from the parked white MARTZ bus, in the N407RR helicopter photo:
aal77.com...


The actual photo I refer to as indicating no smoke at all during or just after all rescuers were whisked away back to the underpass of Route 27, was taken with a tele-lens by a guy standing on the parking near wing 8 from the Navy Annex. Not Riskus but .. ?
What time was that again? It took about 15 minutes before they allowed rescuers back in. And then, surprisingly, the diesel generator fire which was out, fired up again. Providing again that huge dark cloud above the Pentagon.

This is a nice overhead photo where artistic types can try to construct flight paths in.
I don't dare to do that, since the helicopter view is quite fish-eye-lens distorted, the proposed flight paths would seem to bend much more than they actually would have done :

Link: aal77.com...




I still think my proposed blue line flight path, NoC, is quite accurate, only the last 200 meters could perhaps bend back a bit passing the first of the Two Trees, to cover the actual proposed "impact" point, which it then flew over according to CIT.

I begin to tend to adhere to parts of that CIT theory, the fly-over, but I still think that something else than their proposed planted explosives did the damage inside.

To me it still looks like a pack of missiles, which in fact took out the light poles before impact and then delivered that damage path. Think of depleted uranium loaded super-sonic bunker busters.
Human eyes will not see them coming at more than Mach 3. They will not register anything that fast, from that distance.

And such missiles will account for the low smoke trails in the Security boot videos released by the DoD.
And the absence in those two videos of a 757.... Which however opens up another can of worms, since where has that 757 THEN flown? Not in the viewing field of those two cameras.
So, are these videos fake/altered, or not? That's the main question regarding these videos.

And I tend to say fake or altered, regarding all the new/old testimonies unearthed lately by me, and the others already by CIT.

Originally posted by LaBTop
killtown.911review.org...

Bill Gates No Longer World's Richest Man.

" Warren Buffett is the richest man on the planet.
Riding the surging price of Berkshire Hathaway stock, America's most beloved investor has seen his fortune swell to an estimated $62 billion, up $10 billion from a year ago. That massive pile of scratch puts him ahead of Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, who was the richest man in the world for 13 straight years.""

So where was Warren Buffett the morning of 9/11 and what was he doing?

Mr. Buffett was reportedly at his home in Omaha, Nebraska watching TV when he heard about the terrorist attacks. He was getting ready to host his "last annual golf charity event" which just happened to be at the U.S. Strategic Command headquarters located at Offutt Air Force Base in Omaha. Offutt AFB is, coincidentally, where President G. W. Bush flew to on Air Force One later in the day for "safety." This early golf charity event hosted by Mr. Buffett was to include celebrities, professional athletes, and a small group of business leaders in which one of these business leaders became a very lucky person.

This very lucky person was Anne Tatlock, the CEO of Fiduciary Trust Co. International. Now what made Mrs. Tatlock such a lucky person for being invited to this charity event that morning? Mrs.Tatlock not only works in the World Trade Center, but her offices were right where Flight 175 crashed into the South WTC Tower.
She was escorted by military officers to an officer's lounge with TV to watch it happen.

What a heap of strange coincidences that day, ain't it so?

wow! just WOW. R u efin kiddin me right now?

Just when I think I've seen it all and the coincidences can't get any more amazing and bizarre, I keep finding new revelations and anomalies popping up over and over. It blows my mind how much material, evidence, facts and coincidences of astronomical odds are available to research from this conspiracy.

The most incredible part though is the fact that this conspiracy is SO BLATANT and OBVIOUS that common sense alone without all the evidence should be enough for even those with .00001% of intelligence to see the clear INSIDE JOB.

there's a line where coincidence becomes MORE THAN or BEYOND COINCIDENCE.. One or two i can understand and a few anomalies or unanswered questions and problems with the OS, i'd be more than willing to accept and deal with.. BUT THIS IS EFIN CRAZY.

On one hand it gives me hope that there is so much evidence proving inside job and that sometimes it just takes a while for the TRUTH to resonate due to the scope of this conspiracy since afterall even I didn't understand or realize the scope until years later, but then on the other hand, I'm beginning to think MOST are as ignorant and retarded as I feared and that no matter how much PROOF and EVIDENCE there is, they either don't care, don't have the time to investigate, and will DENY it til the bitter end... sadly, thats exactly what type of future is coming.. THE END.

There's more investigation when a 7 ELEVEN gets a robbed!

Truth be told.. AMERICA is DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED!

seriously.

excuse my rant but...

People in the KNOW who GET IT and understand the implications of 911 going ignored by the MASSES including its government, really better start waking up and PREPARING for whats coming soon.

the UNITED STATES IS FINISHED.

the only future this country has to look forward to are far worse 911's that will probably involve CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL or NUCLEAR TERRORISM most likely from the enemies within AGAIN if IRAN and JIHADISTS now pissed off at the USA and ZIONISTS for framing them, don't take out a western city first.

The final signs and warnings are being given for those who see the bigger picture.

Stock up on survial supplies in a remote area AWAY from MAJOR CITIES since they're all TARGETS now.

Originally posted by LaBTop


To me it still looks like a pack of missiles, which in fact took out the light poles before impact and then delivered that damage path. Think of depleted uranium loaded super-sonic bunker busters.

Have you seen our latest interview with Lloyde the cab driver?

The damage to his cab was clearly staged and he virtually admitted to being involved.

"One thing about it you gotta understand something when people do things and get away with it, you - eventually its gonna come to me; and when it comes to me its going to be so big I can't do nothing about it."

~Lloyde England

Plus you obviously have not closely looked at the damage to the light poles if you can suggest for one second that it was caused by "a pack of missiles".

Originally posted by LaBTop
To me it still looks like a pack of missiles, which in fact took out the light poles before impact and then delivered that damage path. Think of depleted uranium loaded super-sonic bunker busters.
Human eyes will not see them coming at more than Mach 3. They will not register anything that fast, from that distance.

Its stuff like this that keeps bringing me back to ATS...I swear.

Mach 3 cruise missiles - a pack of them - that nobody saw, or heard.

What will be the response from Labtop?

First off a hurt and pained post saying "I was only asking questions! I was only offering suggestions!"

Then comes the defensiveness:

"Well, the pack of cruise missiles - they were small!"

ANYTHING going mach 3 is going to make a pretty significant sound - called a sonic boom. Especially a "pack of missiles". That would be one helluva sonic event.

But, the answer will go, the Military has all this super-duper-double-secret-squirrel technology and they can make the supersonic mach 3 cruise missiles silent! - not to mention invisible!

Now the Chinese or Russians are into the mix because they are the only nations that would have had the technology in 2001 to have hypersonic cruise missiles. The BFEE (Bush Family Evil Empire) would have had to contract with those nations to obtain such weapons.

I swear...another 5 years and Elvis will be identified as the mastermind behind this thing as he pulls the strings from his secret base on Mars.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

The damage to his cab was clearly staged and he virtually admitted to being involved.

Just curious.....how does one quantify "virtually" with regards to legal machinations? Who assigns a quantitative value to "virtually" and what is it? Is it you who defines exactly what "virtually" means? Is it 51%? 75%? 99.9 %?

I'm not certain YOU will be allowed to create/use your own definition of the word "virtually", much less use it in your arguments in front of the bench (assumes that ever happens...in my lifetime). "Virtually" seems to afford at least the presumption of "reasonable doubt", and as long as that exists you will be forever tilting at this windmill - something I think you'll be doing regardless.

In any event, if all you have is "virtually", Lloyd can sleep well and not be concerned about being harassed any more by the CIT Boys.

Where will we see "virtually" next? The C-130 "virtually" took off and headed to P-56!

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
The damage to his cab was clearly staged and he virtually admitted to being involved.

Great, when's the trial?



[edit on 12-2-2009 by adam_zapple]

Pinch.

This is the link address from Archive.org, about an audio interview on 9/11 with Joel Sucherman, USAToday.com Multimedia Editor who saw it all: an American Airlines jetliner fly left to right across his field of vision as he commuted to work on Tuesday morning, 09-11-2001 :

( web.archive.org...://play.rbn.com/?url=usat/usat/g2demand/010911sucherman.ra& )
I put it up like this, so you can read the whole link, instead of it getting cut up through the forum software. It still does however.

" I heard a sonic boom and then the impact, the explosion.
" ... There were light poles down. There was what appeared to be the outside covering of the jet strewn about. ... Within about two minutes there were firetrucks on the scene.
" Within a minute another plane started veering up and to the side. At that point it wasn't clear if that plane was trying to maneuver out of the air space or if that plane was coming round for another hit.
Audio recorded report, on his way to work.

And this is an interview by CBS on the morning of 911, at 11:02 A.M. in the USAToday building, and please listen to Joel Sucherman saying those exact same words you asked for, ""sonic boom".

Also watch the body language of the female reporter, Lauren Ashburn, when she asked him what plane he saw.
The moment he mentioned ""a 757", she snaps her head around towards the camera man as if saying ""did you GET that?"". Quite extraordinary, if you ask me. As if she knew that mentioning a 757 was important to the editors and to strengthen the already media hipe'd and pushed story.

Pentagon witness Joel Sucherman, CBS 11:02 9/11:

www.youtube.com...



""There was a sonic boom and looking straight ahead, there was a jet etc.""

Now, Pinch, you and I both know that a 757 can't produce a sonic boom, so explain to us why Joel would have heard that sonic boom, before he even saw that plane?

And there were more witnesses who heard sonic booms, most of their reports have been quickly waved away and the links to their stories are defunct. But, Archive.org is a beautiful resource for investigating minds.
And of course the ones who save everything they found from the very beginning.

Please also note that Joel knew very well the difference between "West to East" and "Southwest" when describing flight paths.
He indicates that the plane flew West to East, crossing over Washington Boulevard, which is what he would see when a plane came from a North of Citgo flight path, and NOT coming from a Southwestern direction when it would have followed the officially endorsed South of Citgo flight path.

Joel's explanation again fits well with my blue line drawing of a flight path over the Navy Annex, passing just North of Citgo and then crossing over Washington Boulevard near or over the Two Trees on the Pentagon lawn in front of the heli-pad.

He described the second plane (was it really the C-130?) as coming from a Southwesterly approach (""off to the Southwest""), so he knew very well his position on the road and the flight paths followed by the planes he observed.

[edit on 13/2/09 by LaBTop]

On a side note, there are many witnesses calling it "booms" instead of sonic booms by the way.
More mentioning of three "booms", an initial one and two more "booms":

www.youtube.com...




And, by the way, if you don't belief in cruise missiles flying in formation, you're not up to date.
23 Mar 03. Formation of cruise missiles caught by pilot flying to Baghdad :

www.youtube.com...



Pretty interesting, ain't it.


Russian supersonic cruise missile, the Yakhont (Sapphire) cruise missile:

www.youtube.com...




Russian Navy supersonic 3M80 Moskit BrahMos Sunburn Yakhont Onix:

www.youtube.com...



There ain't much defense against these fast ones, and they are the main reason the former US administration hasn't attacked Iran, who is in possession of these. The US aircraft carriers and other floating fleet material are basically defenseless against them, their countermeasures are far too slow for them.

And this is the recent Indian/Russian combined effort in super- (Mach3) and hypersonic- (Mach7) missiles:

www.youtube.com...



Above water fleets are pretty outdated nowadays, if no answer will be found to these kind of attacks.
This technology existed pre-9/11, already in the hands of US weapons developers.

A retired Marines commander who defeated his opponents in a pretty expensive war game, exercised before the invasion of Iraq, was already aware of them and used them triumphantly, see one of my first posts on this board, years ago. The whole Persian Gulf fleet was obliterated in that war game.
So they called it off, and just started all over again.
Getting the commander very pissed off, who then went public with it.
You can't ignore reality. He, just as me, must have thought.

Why do these Truthers make my head hurt all the time? Becuase I laugh too hard, I guess.

Originally posted by LaBTop
And this is an interview by CBS on the morning of 911, at 11:02 A.M. in the USAToday building, and please listen to Joel Sucherman saying those exact same words you asked for, ""sonic boom".

A bunch of people said the sound made by the World Trade Center falling was like that of a train. So, using your logic, I suppose a big ol' diesel train drove out of lower Manhattan when the towers fell.

""There was a sonic boom and looking straight ahead, there was a jet etc.""

Now, Pinch, you and I both know that a 757 can't produce a sonic boom, so explain to us why Joel would have heard that sonic boom, before he even saw that plane?

Why would Sucherman say he saw a 757 if it were actually a bunch of cruise missiles? Why would Sucherman mistake what he thought was a 757 to be a pack of cruise missiles? Why would Sucherman make such an error of gargantuan proportions if he actually saw a pack of cruise missiles instead of what he said he DID see, a 757?

You truthers are really getting pretty crazy at selective quoting. Craig and tezz will take Boger's NOC claim but won't accept his impact claim. You'll believe Sucherman when he says there was a "sonic boom" but you won't when he says he saw a 757.

BTW, a "sonic boom" is nothing more than a very, very, very loud noise. Using a "sonic boom" comparison reference to a very, very, very loud noise is commonplace, and unless you want to start arguing that a diesel train drove down the towers (I hope I'm not planting any seeds here), Sucherman's reference is nothing more than just that - an auditory comparison.

And don't let Craig read this "sonic boom" thread else he'll start jumping on you since all his "witnesses" were a heckuvalot closer to the building and a) didn't report any "sonic boom" and b) reported seeing an aircraft and c) many, who had the ability to see the building, report they watched the aircraft slam into the side.

To sum it up, you have 1 direct reference to what someone thought sounded like a "sonic boom" (and I'm sure it might have sounded like one! I know what a sonic boom sounds like (very distinctive) since I've been in and around military/naval aviation for nearly 25 years, but Sucherman, I submit, is equating a very, very, very loud noise to being a "sonic boom") and perhaps a few others that you do not document. If there were multiple sonic booms generated by multiple supersonic cruise missiles flying through Arlington that morning at low altitude, we'd certainly hear about it from more people than Joel Sucherman.

Originally posted by LaBTop
On a side note, there are many witnesses calling it "booms" instead of sonic booms by the way.
More mentioning of three "booms", an initial one and two more "booms":

Plane fly fast. Plane hit building. Plane go BOOM.

And, by the way, if you don't belief in cruise missiles flying in formation, you're not up to date.
23 Mar 03. Formation of cruise missiles caught by pilot flying to Baghdad :

No, I don't "belief" in cruise missile formations because they can't do that. Do you "belief" in cruise missile formations?

As far as "up to date", I was watching that video when it first came out of Iraq back in the spring of 2003. When did you first see it?

That video is a classic example of why ignorance is not necessarily bliss and why relying on YouTube for logic and facts is the first and biggest step towards making a total fool out of yourself.

Those aren't cruise missiles. Its a formation of geese, flying at a 90-degree relative angle to a Brit C-130 that is filming it. That is what gives it the illusion of speed. How do I know this? I used this video in a brief I used to give on the Air Component Commander of the Joint Task Force make-up so had to find out the background of the video. I also sat next to, for about a year, the Navy's Tomahawk cruise missile program manager in the Pentagon. I asked him about this very same video and he said no, it wasn't tomahawks.

Pretty interesting, ain't it.

Yeah, if you like Iraqi geese.

And all your posts and info on Russian supersonic cruise missiles are nice and cool and all that and you get a Gold Star for your Google search skills, but please don't try to tell me about issues of military/national security capabilities of our enemy. Google is fun to find out the height of the Eiffel Tower, but when it comes to national security and strategic/operational/tactical military acumen, you're just playing a game.

Knock yourself out, though! And keep showing your friends the "cruise missile formation"! They'll think you are real cool.


[edit on 14-2-2009 by pinch]

Originally posted by pinch




As far as "up to date", I was watching that video when it first came out of Iraq back in the spring of 2003. When did you first see it?

That video is a classic example of why ignorance is not necessarily bliss and why relying on YouTube for logic and facts is the first and biggest step towards making a total fool out of yourself.

Those aren't cruise missiles. Its a formation of geese, flying at a 90-degree relative angle to a Brit C-130 that is filming it. That is what gives it the illusion of speed. How do I know this? I used this video in a brief I used to give on the Air Component Commander of the Joint Task Force make-up so had to find out the background of the video. I also sat next to, for about a year, the Navy's Tomahawk cruise missile program manager in the Pentagon. I asked him about this very same video and he said no, it wasn't tomahawks.

Yeah, if you like Iraqi geese.

Knock yourself out, though! And keep showing your friends the "cruise missile formation"! They'll think you are real cool.


[edit on 14-2-2009 by pinch]

I'm truly impressed.

Never before in my life have I ever seen a flock of geese flying in such a perfect
formation over what appears to be quite a long distance.

There's virtually no marked change between the positions of the individual geese and their mutual distance from one another.

This is quite a remarkable sight.

Normally one would often see variance and change in the positions of the various
geese. Some would lack a little bit behind now and then, while the gaps between the
main group would fluctuate according to wind shifts or whatever, but not here.

pinch, do you think this video montage could be considered "A world first"??

Originally posted by pinch
Craig and tezz will take Boger's NOC claim but won't accept his impact claim.

Moderators, please note that pinch is breaking the terms and conditions of this website.

He has repeatedly made this false claim about me in more than one thread. He has not once provided a quote by me to support his false claim. I have asked pinch to support this claim or retract it, yet he still continues to spread this BS about me.

This is a thread about Morin and the Naval Annex. Why is member pinch allowed to mention my name with a false reference to Boger in this thread? It's off topic and should not be allowed.

Thanks.

[edit on 14-2-2009 by tezzajw]

Originally posted by pinch
BTW, a "sonic boom" is nothing more than a very, very, very loud noise. Using a "sonic boom" comparison reference to a very, very, very loud noise is commonplace, and unless you want to start arguing that a diesel train drove down the towers (I hope I'm not planting any seeds here), Sucherman's reference is nothing more than just that - an auditory comparison.

BTW, "(3*)very lound noise" doesn't fully describe a "sonic boom." The mathematics is quite complicated, but the wavefront is a discontinuity in air pressure, often described as a "Prandtl-Glauert singularity."

antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Prandtl-Glauert singularity Wikipedia entry

Wikipedia sonic boom entry

www.wilk4.com...

www.fact-archive.com...

The sound is an effect, not a cause (and cannot keep up with the singularity in supersonic flight).

RH

Originally posted by tezzajw
This is a thread about Morin and the Naval Annex.

If so, why are you talking about me in this post? Why not just use a U2U to the mods?

Originally posted by djeminy




I'm truly impressed.

Never before in my life have I ever seen a flock of geese flying in such a perfect
formation over what appears to be quite a long distance.

okay, okay... I'll ask:

What was the longest distance you ever watched a flock of Iraqi geese fly?

Originally posted by rhunter
BTW, "(3*)very lound noise" doesn't fully describe a "sonic boom." The mathematics is quite complicated, but the wavefront is a discontinuity in air pressure, often described as a "Prandtl-Glauert singularity."

The sound is an effect, not a cause (and cannot keep up with the singularity in supersonic flight).

RH

Concur. I've been in the pointy end of an F-14 at mach 2 and can attest *all* the sound is behind you.

I suppose the tie-in (with a nod to the Mods and another poster) to Morin's account is that he didn't report hearing anything even close to a sonic boom, much less what would have been the auditory effect of a number of large cruise missiles flying 50 feet away from him at or above approx 760 mph.

Originally posted by djeminy
pinch, do you think this video montage could be considered "A world first"??

Could be. I'm not aware of any other targeting-pod videos recorded by a C-130 (or any other aircraft) of geese flying in formation - Iraqi or otherwise. They may be out there. All the video I took from the F-14 TCS (television camera system) was of other aircraft or surface surveillance activity.

To make this post related to the thread (with a nod to the Mods and another ATS poster), I don't know if Terry Morin is aware of this video, and I know for a fact in none of his interviews did he mention geese (or cruise missiles - in fact he said he saw an aircraft) or say that he heard sonic booms, which would have had a rather pronounced auditory effect had that indeed happened.



[edit on 14-2-2009 by pinch]

:

[edit on 14-2-2009 by djeminy]

Originally posted by CameronFox

Originally posted by djeminy




I'm truly impressed.

Never before in my life have I ever seen a flock of geese flying in such a perfect
formation over what appears to be quite a long distance.

okay, okay... I'll ask:

What was the longest distance you ever watched a flock of Iraqi geese fly?

What! Can a C-130 really fly as slow as a flock of geese does in flight!!

Tell me fox, with that video, are you really trying to help us exposing pinch (even further) as being a total fool?

Hard to imagine that would have been your purpose, but of course, wonders never
cease to amaze!