*new presentation* Over The Navy Annex featuring Terry Morin

posted by CameronFox

Well, I have to give you kudos for at least answering my question Spreston. I can't say the same for others.

Now, I suggest you re-read his interview and THEN tell me, from what you read, where does he place the plane.

There is a reason why Craig won't answer the question.

Luckily I have just recently reviewed Terry Morin's accounts and he places the aircraft above him while he was 10 steps inside between the wings of the Naval Annex. That places the aircraft Over the Naval Annex which is fatal to the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY. Unfortunately for you, he also places the tail too high to the east to possibly hit the light poles or the 1st floor.

Sorry if that ruins your day CameronFox. Did I win the contest?

There is a reason why Craig won't answer the question.

Craig doesn't want to see you cry?



[edit on 1/5/09 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


Spreston... yes YOU WIN!!

Your graphics are not accurate are they? Check em again!

We are going by what he saw. He did not ever say that he lost sight of the plane over the Annex... he lost sight behind some trees.

CameronFox

The bottom line here is that he places the Plane above him at the Naval Annex. Now, I don't believe it credible that he should be *THAT* wrong. This is something that would be very difficult to miss don't you think?

IT just happens that he places the plane where many other witnesses place it.

The most compelling fact is that the plane was above him at the Annex, and I don't see how you would think he could be incorrect about such a thing. We can argue about the secondary details, but the primary detail here is damaging to the Official Story.

posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by CameronFox

 

You are not being civil and you are not staying on topic.

This thread is not about what side of the citgo station the plane flew nor is it about the Pentagon flyover.

It is about whether or not the plane flew over the navy annex.

It appears as though you agree with Morin on this point so thank you for admitting that 9/11 was an inside job.

Have a great day.

Is CameronFox on our side now?

Nah. I think he is still dragging his feet.

Give him another week until the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY sinks completely into the quicksand its foundations were built upon.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Spin away fellas.

We have proven that the plane flew directly over the Navy Annex.

Then it did not fly your new "100% CIT Certified Robert's flight path."

You can't have it both ways but you tried to and it backfired. You debunked yourself.

It's time for your confession that CIT's fairy tale 'investigation" is over.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by jthomas


It couldn't, by your latest flight path, the one you claimed Roosevelt Robert's stated he saw, thereby completely and utterly invalidating any flight path over the Naval Annex. You know you can't have it both ways.

Huh?

No you are wrong.

No, I am right. You messed up and debunked yourself.

We always have the plane flying over the Navy Annex.

But it could not have physically or aerodynamically flown over both the Naval Annex AND your latest flight path.

You already know that is impossible. NO pilot could do it and NO aircraft could do it. It can only be one or the other. You tried to have it both ways and you messed up.

It is 100% fact that you debunked yourself, and now you only need to admit it and that CIT's fairy tale is over.

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by jthomas
No one saw any aircraft fly over and away from the Pentagon.

That's not the topic of this thread, jthomas. Why do you persist in trying to drag the thread off topic?

Read again and understand that it is directly related to what Morin could have or could not have seen according to CIT's latest flight path.

I repeat:

CIT's latest flight path shows what an aircraft cannot do, nor what any pilot would do. Craig put himself in a position of having to choose between the aircraft flying over the Naval Annex OR or flying over the Pentagon.

It can ONLY be one or the other according to Craig's own flight path. It cannot be both.

You may not like the fact that NO pilot and NO aircraft could fly over the Naval Annex AND CIT's flight path over the Pentagon. So which is it?

It's obvious that Morin saw the aircraft therefore CIT's latest flight path over the Pentagon is impossible.

And Morin saw AA77 fly south of Citgo.

Originally posted by talisman
CameronFox

With all due respect, Craig does not have to account for every single thing in his theory. Craig has a hypothesis, and the data for the most part seems to fit regarding the flight path. It does not have to be 100% accurate, or figured to the smallest detail.

Unfortunately, factual assertions as Craig makes, do not fall under the definition of "theory."

Craig states as fact that his eyewitnesses prove a NoC flight path and therefore "prove" no jet could have hit the Pentagon. No matter that the physical and witness evidence contradicts him.

Now if he were to actually have a theory, he would be obligated to account for ALL of the evidence and that evidence would have to be consistent with his theory. But, as is well known, he refuses to do so and we know he has yet to demonstrate anything he claims.

posted by talisman
CameronFox

The bottom line here is that he places the Plane above him at the Naval Annex. Now, I don't believe it credible that he should be *THAT* wrong. This is something that would be very difficult to miss don't you think?

IT just happens that he places the plane where many other witnesses place it.

The most compelling fact is that the plane was above him at the Annex, and I don't see how you would think he could be incorrect about such a thing. We can argue about the secondary details, but the primary detail here is damaging to the Official Story.

Yes indeed. The Flight 77 official 535 mph flight path cannot possibly be Over the Naval Annex at any time or place, and still knock down the light poles and enter the Pentagon along the official damage path.

Thank you Terry Morin. You have destroyed the official lie. Well actually the other 20+ Over the Naval Annex eyewitnesses did most of the damage; but you were the last hope for the nervous Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY faithful believers and loyal defenders. You let them down, even though you did not want Craig to snitch on you. Quick thinking Craig; well done. Force the issue and maybe the dummies will sue you. Grow some cohones Morin and come out with more details, and complete the slaughter of the fanatical hopes and dreams of the 9-11 perp cheerleaders.

So the bottom line here is that if the plane was anywhere over the navy annex or anywhere north of Columbia Pike it absolutely 100% proves a military deception on 9/11 every bit as much as north of the citgo.

It's really that simple and the evidence is really this strong.

When Terry Morin states...

If the Air Force Memorial had been built, the plane would have ran right into it.

...world history was made.

How does the plane's location above the annex prove military involvement? Navy cooperation would not have been required.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS


If the plane was ONA it fatally contradicts all official reports, data, and physical damage proving the plane did not hit the Pentagon.

Since it proves the 9/11 official narrative false there is no question that such a complex black operation couldn't have been pulled off without involvement of those with access to and control of the resources of U.S. military and intelligence.

It has nothing to do with the Navy specifically or any of our armed forces.

It was a psychological black operation of mass murder as a strategic pretext for permanent global war.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Since it proves the 9/11 official narrative false there is no question that such a complex black operation couldn't have been pulled off without involvement of those with access to and control of the resources of U.S. military and intelligence.

It has nothing to do with the Navy specifically or any of our armed forces.

If this "military deception" had "nothing to do with our armed forces"...then what military are you referring to?

reply to post by adam_zapple


Since it proves the 9/11 official narrative false there is no question that such a complex black operation couldn't have been pulled off without involvement of those with access to and control of the resources of U.S. military and intelligence.

I really don't know how I can be any more clear.

It was a covert black operation.

Illegal war crimes happen all the time throughout the world but this one happened here and was on such a massive scale that it could not have happened without military resources.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
I really don't know how I can be any more clear.

By explaining this:

How can a "military deception" have "nothing to do with any of our armed forces"?

reply to post by adam_zapple


Easily.

The people in control of the military utilized its resources illegally and covertly without using the troops.

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by adam_zapple

 

Easily.

The people in control of the military utilized its resources illegally and covertly without using the troops.

A military deception with no troops?
Without troops to operate planes, weapons, etc....what resources did they have?

Who, specifically, are these "people in control"?

What evidence do you have of the involvement or actions of these individuals?

reply to post by adam_zapple


Yes the operation could have been accomplished without any troops.

For the necessary human resources they would have most likely utilized mercenaries, double-agents, or operatives without any sworn commitments to the USA since of course participating in such a war crime would be high treason.

I'll admit you are forcing me into the realm of speculation as it's also possible that some troops were used as well.

However the independent evidence I provide simply proves the official narrative false.

The OP of this thread and many others that I have posted here addresses this evidence. Feel free to search them or visit our website where it is all compiled, cataloged, and presented for you to view in full at no cost.

www.thepentacon.com...

I don't claim to know exactly who was involved with physically executing the attack.

I only claim to have evidence proving the official narrative false.

But I also strongly believe that the operation could not have been completed without the resources of U.S. military and intelligence.

If you feel this is a leap of logic fair enough, we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

Moving forward if you wish to continue participating in this thread I respectfully request that you stick to the evidence presented in the OP as the rules of this forum require.

Thanks.