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.
Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate!
page: 22share:
reply to post by trebor451
I'm just surprised that CIT and those that religiously take their word as from God, dont stop and think about something called perspective. How can they clearly see the plane fly NoC unless they are directly under it? Case in point:
How much you want to make a bet that quite a few people believe that 747 actually flew over the Golden Gate Bridge? But did it? Let's look at it from another angle:
As we can see, it did not. But you'd think that good ol Craige Ranke and CIT would stop and think about this possibility?
I'm just surprised that CIT and those that religiously take their word as from God, dont stop and think about something called perspective. How can they clearly see the plane fly NoC unless they are directly under it? Case in point:
How much you want to make a bet that quite a few people believe that 747 actually flew over the Golden Gate Bridge? But did it? Let's look at it from another angle:
As we can see, it did not. But you'd think that good ol Craige Ranke and CIT would stop and think about this possibility?
Stop that ridiculous "perspective" argument. Just note where William Lagasse stood.
Under the Northern canopy of the CITGO. And the plane flew very low, right in front of him.
He was looking at the pump counter. We have him on video, in the CITGO video.
So he looked north. The plane flew no more than maximum 100 meters in front of him, NORTH.
NO one in his right mind can introduce "perspective" regarding his account, which is btw the main reason why I do not believe any arguments brought to the plate to defend a SoC flight path.
I have a lot more arguments, but this is the main one.
Under the Northern canopy of the CITGO. And the plane flew very low, right in front of him.
He was looking at the pump counter. We have him on video, in the CITGO video.
So he looked north. The plane flew no more than maximum 100 meters in front of him, NORTH.
NO one in his right mind can introduce "perspective" regarding his account, which is btw the main reason why I do not believe any arguments brought to the plate to defend a SoC flight path.
I have a lot more arguments, but this is the main one.
reply to post by WetBlanky
Aldo, this screen-shot of yours slipped under my event horizon for a while :
It's a bit sad for you that you seem to think these witnesses of the C-130 turning high in the sky on the western side of the billowing smoke column rising AFTER the impact, were evidence of your fly-over theory.
I'll address this text part :
""At no time did a plane circle DC as reported""
He apparently stood on top of a building somewhere in DC. Because he became afraid DC would be a target.
AAL77 however did not circle DC, that is the area of Washington City which lays north of the Potomac River. It made however a huge descending circle in the Virginia skies, south of the Potomac River and far south of the Pentagon and at the last long leg, back up northeastwards on its way back to the Pentagon basin, it was already so low, that they apparently did not notice it coming and ending up slamming in the west wall at the end of that very low run-up to the west wall of the Pentagon.
But they heard the impact explosion and noticed the huge smoke column slowly rising up, and AFTER that (+/- 60 secs) a large plane, a C-130, that made a sharp U-turn in the sky just in front (on the western side) of the TOP of that enormous smoke column which was leaning southeastwards caused by the winds coming from northwest that day.
That was also the indication how long after impact, it took O'Brien to reach that smoke column, that had reached about 1000 meter height by then.
That was the C-130 piloted by Lt.Col. Steve O'Brien, which you, Aldo, have interviewed by phone, years later, and showed us also emails from him, explaining he was trailing far behind AAL77.
Which he saw first crossing his eyesight southwards, in front of his C-130, in its first leg of the huge U-turn it made back to the Pentagon, just after the C-130 departed from Andrews Air Force Base, after which he got asked by Air Control to turn and follow AAL77, which turn took him so much time that he ended up far behind AA77, which was already in the last long leg back towards the Pentagon. O'Brien could not even see the impact he said, only the smoke caused by it. About 60 seconds later he reported by radio to his AC guy, that the plane (AAL77) apparently had hit the west wall of the Pentagon.
We have several photo's of that rising smoke column with the C-130 high in the sky making it's U-turn back towards the northwest in the direction of Dulles Airport, shot by the guy standing on the city side bank of the Potomac River. O'Brien returned to his earlier flight plan, back to the Minnesota airfield where his National Air Guard C-130 was headed to when he took off from Andrews.
If you would at last understand a few things which you get totally wrong, you could say goodbye to any fly-over theory, and are left again with the most shocking real and good part of your work, the eyewitnesses who definitely saw a NoC flight path, and also definitely a MUCH slower flying plane.
Balsamo has used the end-speed from the FDR, while you yourself have unearthed that it can not be true, since Sean Boger saw it come towards him from over the Annex in 10 to 12 seconds, Middleton says it flew about 10 seconds in his sight, Morin estimated 10 seconds to impact, and so on. Many witnesses describe a much slower flying plane, right banking 20 to 30°.
Pay attention to onesliceshort's YouTube video "Speed" I linked to.
Do you really believe that plane could have covered THAT short arc distance with THAT tremendous speed of 540 MPH?
That sledge you see in his video, striking past you at 500 MPH, far in front of you, is just a part of a second light flash !!!!
So you think AAL77 could have done a likewise thing, but at an even higher speed? In a 30° right bank?
It could not have covered with that speed even a 2° bank over that short distance. Use that online bank calculator, and see how big the radius (which is half the diameter) must be, at 540 MPH. You end up with a NEAR STRAIGHT FLIGHT PATH over that short distance.
That's what you have to understand and what Balsamo does not understand.
But you think because he's a pilot, he must be right.
You two have been conned. And thus seems your finest hour nullified, by a ridiculous fly-over theory. Luckily for us, your videotaped witnesses stay upright, and that's what makes the official story followers so nervous. They know deep inside something is rotten there in Washington.
Aldo, this screen-shot of yours slipped under my event horizon for a while :
It's a bit sad for you that you seem to think these witnesses of the C-130 turning high in the sky on the western side of the billowing smoke column rising AFTER the impact, were evidence of your fly-over theory.
I'll address this text part :
""At no time did a plane circle DC as reported""
He apparently stood on top of a building somewhere in DC. Because he became afraid DC would be a target.
AAL77 however did not circle DC, that is the area of Washington City which lays north of the Potomac River. It made however a huge descending circle in the Virginia skies, south of the Potomac River and far south of the Pentagon and at the last long leg, back up northeastwards on its way back to the Pentagon basin, it was already so low, that they apparently did not notice it coming and ending up slamming in the west wall at the end of that very low run-up to the west wall of the Pentagon.
But they heard the impact explosion and noticed the huge smoke column slowly rising up, and AFTER that (+/- 60 secs) a large plane, a C-130, that made a sharp U-turn in the sky just in front (on the western side) of the TOP of that enormous smoke column which was leaning southeastwards caused by the winds coming from northwest that day.
That was also the indication how long after impact, it took O'Brien to reach that smoke column, that had reached about 1000 meter height by then.
That was the C-130 piloted by Lt.Col. Steve O'Brien, which you, Aldo, have interviewed by phone, years later, and showed us also emails from him, explaining he was trailing far behind AAL77.
Which he saw first crossing his eyesight southwards, in front of his C-130, in its first leg of the huge U-turn it made back to the Pentagon, just after the C-130 departed from Andrews Air Force Base, after which he got asked by Air Control to turn and follow AAL77, which turn took him so much time that he ended up far behind AA77, which was already in the last long leg back towards the Pentagon. O'Brien could not even see the impact he said, only the smoke caused by it. About 60 seconds later he reported by radio to his AC guy, that the plane (AAL77) apparently had hit the west wall of the Pentagon.
We have several photo's of that rising smoke column with the C-130 high in the sky making it's U-turn back towards the northwest in the direction of Dulles Airport, shot by the guy standing on the city side bank of the Potomac River. O'Brien returned to his earlier flight plan, back to the Minnesota airfield where his National Air Guard C-130 was headed to when he took off from Andrews.
If you would at last understand a few things which you get totally wrong, you could say goodbye to any fly-over theory, and are left again with the most shocking real and good part of your work, the eyewitnesses who definitely saw a NoC flight path, and also definitely a MUCH slower flying plane.
Balsamo has used the end-speed from the FDR, while you yourself have unearthed that it can not be true, since Sean Boger saw it come towards him from over the Annex in 10 to 12 seconds, Middleton says it flew about 10 seconds in his sight, Morin estimated 10 seconds to impact, and so on. Many witnesses describe a much slower flying plane, right banking 20 to 30°.
Pay attention to onesliceshort's YouTube video "Speed" I linked to.
Do you really believe that plane could have covered THAT short arc distance with THAT tremendous speed of 540 MPH?
That sledge you see in his video, striking past you at 500 MPH, far in front of you, is just a part of a second light flash !!!!
So you think AAL77 could have done a likewise thing, but at an even higher speed? In a 30° right bank?
It could not have covered with that speed even a 2° bank over that short distance. Use that online bank calculator, and see how big the radius (which is half the diameter) must be, at 540 MPH. You end up with a NEAR STRAIGHT FLIGHT PATH over that short distance.
That's what you have to understand and what Balsamo does not understand.
But you think because he's a pilot, he must be right.
You two have been conned. And thus seems your finest hour nullified, by a ridiculous fly-over theory. Luckily for us, your videotaped witnesses stay upright, and that's what makes the official story followers so nervous. They know deep inside something is rotten there in Washington.
Secondly, you constantly are mixing up R.Roberts first sighting of a low incoming AAL77 a few hundreds meters before impact, with his 50 to 60 seconds
later sighting of the high and slow flying, turning in front of the smoke column, C-130.
Anyone with a neutral stance who listens to his phone interview with you, and the audio from the Library of Congress interview, then combines the information in those two interviews, will understand that you confused the hell out of him in your interview, and did the same with your own mind as a result.
He is clearly switching from AAL77 to C-130 and back, all the time, in your years later interview, while he was distracted because he was driving his car while phoning with you.
And a military man will never say he stood South of the Mall Entrance, when he stood where you now want to place him at East Loading (purple spot). In that case he will state that he stood East of the Mall Entrance.
You two did all the time placed him where I also placed him, at the rim of the east-loading-dock area of South Loading (my red lined light-blue spot). Until a year ago.
See this map of mine with explanatory line and text drawings :
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Anyone with a neutral stance who listens to his phone interview with you, and the audio from the Library of Congress interview, then combines the information in those two interviews, will understand that you confused the hell out of him in your interview, and did the same with your own mind as a result.
He is clearly switching from AAL77 to C-130 and back, all the time, in your years later interview, while he was distracted because he was driving his car while phoning with you.
And a military man will never say he stood South of the Mall Entrance, when he stood where you now want to place him at East Loading (purple spot). In that case he will state that he stood East of the Mall Entrance.
You two did all the time placed him where I also placed him, at the rim of the east-loading-dock area of South Loading (my red lined light-blue spot). Until a year ago.
See this map of mine with explanatory line and text drawings :
files.abovetopsecret.com...
I really hope you understand that R.Roberts could have seen both SoC and NoC flightpaths from AAL77, AND the C-130 flightpath, from the spot in front
of the east loading dock area of South Loading, where I placed him.
My red-lightblue dot in my above map.
But that he could only see the C-130 high in the sky from that East Loading purple dot I placed in my above map, but never ever the two NoC and SoC flight paths. And certainly could not describe any NoC or SoC plane flying low and then CROSSING ROUTE 27, as he said.
He can not see even a meter of Route 27 when he stood where you so dearly want to place him, to make your fly-over come true. It doesn't come true, even when you try all you can to bend his words.
My red-lightblue dot in my above map.
But that he could only see the C-130 high in the sky from that East Loading purple dot I placed in my above map, but never ever the two NoC and SoC flight paths. And certainly could not describe any NoC or SoC plane flying low and then CROSSING ROUTE 27, as he said.
He can not see even a meter of Route 27 when he stood where you so dearly want to place him, to make your fly-over come true. It doesn't come true, even when you try all you can to bend his words.
Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by trebor451
I'm just surprised that CIT and those that religiously take their word as from God, dont stop and think about something called perspective. How can they clearly see the plane fly NoC unless they are directly under it?
As we can see, it did not. But you'd think that good ol Craige Ranke and CIT would stop and think about this possibility?
You do realize the smoking gun witnesses were on the Citgo property or directly behind or in ffront of ott and they definitively saw it on the north side.
The other witnesses like the anc maintenance guys saw the plane come at them and ran UNDER it. Most importantly, they saw it in a significant right hand bank. What they saw and describe is not in the 530 mph official flight path.
Originally posted by LaBTop
Aldo, this screen-shot of yours slipped under my event horizon for a while :
Everyone is either Craig Ranke, Rob Balsamo, or Aldo Marquis apparently. My screen name is WetBlanky and I'd appreciate it if you stick to addressing me by it or I will be forced to report you.
It's a bit sad for you that you seem to think these witnesses of the C-130 turning high in the sky on the western side of the billowing smoke column rising AFTER the impact, were evidence of your fly-over theory.
Well although I accept that it could be the c-130 there is an equal chance it could be the flyover plane. From that perspective it would look like a plane coming out of a cloud. That black smoke cloud formed very quickly, just watch the surveillance video.
I know you are an ignorant and, I assume, proud man but there is no flyover "theory". The plane is on the north side of the Citgo, therefore it did not hit the pentagon. Not only was it on the north side of the Citgo, but it "pulled up" or started to "pivot up" over the highway. That is wholly indicative of a flyover as well.
I'll address this text part :
""At no time did a plane circle DC as reported""
He apparently stood on top of a building somewhere in DC. Because he became afraid DC would be a target.
AAL77 however did not circle DC, that is the area of Washington City which lays north of the Potomac River. It made however a huge descending circle in the Virginia skies, south of the Potomac River and far south of the Pentagon and at the last long leg, back up northeastwards on its way back to the Pentagon basin, it was already so low, that they apparently did not notice it coming and ending up slamming in the west wall at the end of that very low run-up to the west wall of the Pentagon.
Very wrong. Perhaps he missed it while he was BUSY WORKING, but it flew over DC skies. I love how you pretty much masquerade as a truther but basically parrot the official story.
CIT on DC flight path:
-Joe Hurst, Joseph Candelario, Gen Clyde Vaughn, Stuart Artman saw the attack plane in DC skies.
-Ari Fleischer admits there was another flight path that took the plane towards the white house and not well SW of it as the NTSB/RADES data attempts to depict:
Sources say the hijacked jet continued east at a high speed toward the city, but flew several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.
[...]
At the White House Friday, spokesman Ari Fleischer saw it a different way.
"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said, adding, "The plane was headed toward the White House."
www.cbsnews.com...
-ATC Danielle O'Brien was sure the plane "over-shot" or over missed the White House which only fits with the DCl flight path:
O'Brien went to the Pentagon to see what happened for herself, making her ever more certain that the Pentagon was a secondary target, and that the hijackers overshot or missed the White House.
"I've been down to the Pentagon and stood on the hillside and imagined where, according to what I saw on the radar, that flight would have come from," she says. "And I think that they came eastbound and because sun was in their eyes that morning, and because the White House was beyond a grove of trees, I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them. You can't miss the Pentagon. It's so telltale by its shape and its size, and they said, 'Look, there it is. Take that. Get that.' They certainly could have had the White House if they had seen it."
abcnews.go.com... or
abcnews.go.com...
-Col Deskins reports the radar for the attack plane terminating over Washington DC which only fits with DC flight path...
Poster 22205:
video.google.com...
IMPORTANT note at 15:20 minutes video time of the above clip: Colonel Deskins, a lady radar person (with air force uniform), from the New York Command Center (of norad) comes on:
-and she very SPECIFICALLY describes the last maneuver of the plane. whats KEY in her exact quote is this (bolded)
"we caught, on the radar scope, a few blips, maybe 7 or 8 (hands showing the spiral maneuver motion in correspondence with these radar dots), just enough to kinda go around in a half circle and then fade, eh - losing radar contact - RIGHT OVER um, WASHINGTON."[/iedit on 26-11-2011 by WetBlanky because: (no reason given)
Continued...
/
-And of course we have witness steve Chaconas
z3.invisionfree.com...
-Colin Scoggins (and Kevin Nesapany) place the/an unidentified plane SE & east of the White House/Potomac which only fits with the C-130 DC Mall flight path...
Scoggins: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.
Huntress: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?
Scoggins: Yup
Huntress: He's moving away?
Apparently Colin Scoggins recieved this information based on a VISUAL from FAA HQ in Washington DC!!!
“I was on aTELCON and there were people who were actually looking at their window and saw the plane, they were speaking it verbatim on the phone to the TELCON. So it was a visual encounter, I assume they were in FAA HQ on Independence AVE. I know one persons name who was there and according to a USA article on around 9/20/01 I have an idea who said it on the phone, and he is the same person that I received the Phantom 11 call on.”
“I don't know what office window they were looking from, I've always felt it was FAA HQ […] I am 99 % sure that the statement was made by visual...
I was in FOB-8 (FDA) about 3 blocks from the Capitol, watching CNN on my PC because I had been told by a colleague across the hall that a plane had hit the WTC. (Our Center runs CNN off a Netshow encoder 24/7 so we can get news on the network.) I watched the second plane hit the WTC and shortly after that my wife called to tell me there was smoke showing from further down the Mall in the direction of the Whitehouse. (The Whitehouse is in the same direction as the Pentagon from our location at the foot of Capitol Hill.) There were then many rumors spreading in the hallway that car bombs had gone off on the Hill and near the State Dept, supposedly smoke was showing there as well. We now know that the car bomb rumors were false.
My Team Leader came in to say as he was coming in to the building, he saw a 757 flying in a peculiar location roughly over the Mall. (We now know that was the 757 that hit the Pentagon as it did circle downtown DC, supposedly looking for a target, possibly the Whitehouse which is not as easy to pick out from the air as the Capitol or the Pentagon, before heading west again, then turning east for its final run at the Pentagon.)
About that time, I suspected that there might be other hijacked aircraft targeting other buildings in the area (remember, we thought there might have been car bombs going off too at this point) so I walked across the hall to the lab of the colleague who initially told me the WTC had been hit by an aircraft. Looking out of the north facing 4th floor window, I saw the outline of a 747-400 flying slowly south to north nearly directly over head at a low altitude. Planes never flew there as it is restricted airspace, almost over the Capitol. As it turned over NE DC, roughly Union Station I guess, and banked east, the sun hit the pale colored paint and I could see that it was an Air Force E-4 and not a commercial 747. It was going so slow, it appeared to hang in the air over the Hubert Humphrey (HHS) building (across the street from FOB-8). For a moment it crossed my mind that such an aircraft carries much more fuel and could do considerably more damage than the aircraft that had hit the WTC (at this time it was being reported that those aircraft were commuter planes, we didn't know for sure they were 767's, though the outline sure looked like it to me when I saw the second one disappear into the building on CNN). Us chemists were already thinking of fuel loads and explosive equivalents, combustion temperature, melting point of steel, etc. when we watched the first tower collapse. (I'm hazy in my recall of the exact time we watched this relative to the Pentagon crash.)
forums.techguy.org...
-And of course we have witness steve Chaconas
z3.invisionfree.com...
edit on 26-11-2011 by WetBlanky because: (no reason given)
That was the C-130 piloted by Lt.Col. Steve O'Brien, which you, Aldo, have interviewed by phone, years later, and showed us also emails from him, explaining he was trailing far behind AAL77.
Again, my screen name says WetBlanky, not Aldo, doesn't it? I have never interviewed Lt col. Steve O'brien by phone. What's worse neither has CIT. Do some research, armchair researcher.
Which he saw first crossing his eyesight southwards, in front of his C-130, in its first leg of the huge U-turn it made back to the Pentagon, just after the C-130 departed from Andrews Air Force Base, after which he got asked by Air Control to turn and follow AAL77, which turn took him so much time that he ended up far behind AA77, which was already in the last long leg back towards the Pentagon. O'Brien could not even see the impact he said, only the smoke caused by it. About 60 seconds later he reported by radio to his AC guy, that the plane (AAL77) apparently had hit the west wall of the Pentagon.
That's fairly accurate. Except the plane did not hit the pentagon.
We have several photo's of that rising smoke column with the C-130 high in the sky making it's U-turn back towards the northwest in the direction of Dulles Airport, shot by the guy standing on the city side bank of the Potomac River. O'Brien returned to his earlier flight plan, back to the Minnesota airfield where his National Air Guard C-130 was headed to when he took off from Andrews.
Sure. But the guy on top of the building could have seen the flyover as well, as the flyover plane did a u turn to the mall entrance side of the plane, which is in the same direction as Dulles. Did you talk to "americanjock30"? No you didn't. So you don't know what he saw exactly.
If you would at last understand a few things which you get totally wrong, you could say goodbye to any fly-over theory, and are left again with the most shocking real and good part of your work, the eyewitnesses who definitely saw a NoC flight path, and also definitely a MUCH slower flying plane.
Well it's not my theory. It's not even a theory. If the plane flew NoC it flew over. This is accepted by everyone including professional pilots and even CIT's detractors. You are one of two or three layman conspiracy theorists with nothing but their bizarre beliefs to back them up. No math, no scale animations, and really no possible way of it making sense considering the video, the damage path, the untouched light poles etc. It's the height of ignorance.
Balsamo has used the end-speed from the FDR, while you yourself have unearthed that it can not be true,
I didnt unearth anything. Again, i know this is part of the same but post but if you continue to call me Aldo or CIT i will be forced to report you. You really can't be serious can you? Balsamo uses it for what? To illustrate the NTSB's data. The animations are a hypothetical average of all the flight paths given by the witnesses.
since Sean Boger saw it come towards him from over the Annex in 10 to 12 seconds, Middleton says it flew about 10 seconds in his sight, Morin estimated 10 seconds to impact, and so on. Many witnesses describe a much slower flying plane, right banking 20 to 30°.
Pay attention to onesliceshort's YouTube video "Speed" I linked to.
Do you really believe that plane could have covered THAT short arc distance with THAT tremendous speed of 540 MPH?
Yes we all know the plane slowly glided into a high throttled right hand bank. Yes we know CIT documented this. No, CIT (nor PFT) does not believe it made that turn at 540mph. It clearly made the right hand bank to line up with the alleged impact zone and then southern edge of the building.
That's what you have to understand and what Balsamo does not understand.
But you think because he's a pilot, he must be right.
You two have been conned. And thus seems your finest hour nullified, by a ridiculous fly-over theory. Luckily for us, your videotaped witnesses stay upright, and that's what makes the official story followers so nervous. They know deep inside something is rotten there in Washington.
Do you even know what CIT or PFT believes? You sound completely uninformed. CIT clearly states the plane was moving slower than the official 540mph. They as well as Rob Balsamo do not believe the plane was on the north side and traveling 540 mph. You are misinformed or purposefully trying confuse people.
Let me leave you with this...
ANC worker, Erik Dihle: "Some people were yelling that a bomb hit the Pentagon and that a jet kept on going."
Originally posted by LaBTop
Stop that ridiculous "perspective" argument. Just note where William Lagasse stood.
Under the Northern canopy of the CITGO. And the plane flew very low, right in front of him.
He was looking at the pump counter. We have him on video, in the CITGO video.
So he looked north. The plane flew no more than maximum 100 meters in front of him, NORTH.
NO one in his right mind can introduce "perspective" regarding his account, which is btw the main reason why I do not believe any arguments brought to the plate to defend a SoC flight path.
I have a lot more arguments, but this is the main one.
And Terry Morin and Edward Paik have it flying parallel to the Columbia Pike. So unless you want to explain just how it managed to do a fighter jet style high speed bank and turn to go around the Citgo, I think your witness is a little wrong.
Aldo Marquis was the only one who I ever met online who lowered himself and dared to accuse me of having a "hobby", that was in my short online life
in my 7 page thread at the PfT forum. He was also one who used the words "armchair researcher" there, after he did not know how to react on my first
long posts in my only 7 page long PfT thread, and asked for help from Balsamo, to counter my arguments, in a post by him in that 7 page thread.
Post #29 (Asked Rob for help).
Post #35) (He tells me I am a 9/11 hobbyist. Writing that hurts his reputation, not mine).
You use the same "arguments". So for me, I see no difference.
Learn to behave civil, it's easier online, where you have all the time to edit, before you hit the post button. And even up to 4 hours after you posted you can still edit.
So either stop using the same arguments here, or probably get the same treatment as Balsamo falls back on when he gets cornered.
And I hope I get the time to finish this fly-over argument with you, without you getting banned here, so stop using the same old, vitriolic arguments.
For sake of extending your screen name here, I'll address you with WB.
Because I do not want WB to get banned here. So to see Aldo managed to do that repeatedly.
I despise banning, we can defend ourself perfectly, without suddenly loosing grip on our debating partners caused by a sudden ban.
No debate, no real, historical correct truth. Ever.
Let him stay. He's not hurting me, but his reputation with those kinds of insults.
Post #29 (Asked Rob for help).
Post #35) (He tells me I am a 9/11 hobbyist. Writing that hurts his reputation, not mine).
You use the same "arguments". So for me, I see no difference.
Learn to behave civil, it's easier online, where you have all the time to edit, before you hit the post button. And even up to 4 hours after you posted you can still edit.
So either stop using the same arguments here, or probably get the same treatment as Balsamo falls back on when he gets cornered.
And I hope I get the time to finish this fly-over argument with you, without you getting banned here, so stop using the same old, vitriolic arguments.
For sake of extending your screen name here, I'll address you with WB.
Because I do not want WB to get banned here. So to see Aldo managed to do that repeatedly.
I despise banning, we can defend ourself perfectly, without suddenly loosing grip on our debating partners caused by a sudden ban.
No debate, no real, historical correct truth. Ever.
Let him stay. He's not hurting me, but his reputation with those kinds of insults.
Addressing your second and fourth post after my last one : Coming soon.
Addressing your third post after my last one :
reply to post by WetBlanky
CIT were the ones that for years used the argument that the second plane, the C-130, was used to confuse the hell out of all eventual eyewitnesses. So they would eventually mix it up with the AAL77 attack plane.
( Your quote : ""-Colin Scoggins (and Kevin Nesapany) place the/an unidentified plane SE & east of the White House/Potomac which only fits with the C-130 DC Mall flight path... "" )
No, it does not fit with the DC Mall C-130 flight path.
Which would be according to CIT, south of, and parallel to the Mall area in between the White House and the FAA building.
It does fit however the attack plane, AAL77, flying at that moment in the first quadrant of its huge circling maneuver above Virginia grounds, south of the Potomac river.
(Your quote : ""Scoggins: 4 to 6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.
Huntress:He's moving away? "". )
Do me a favor, extend that red line in your map with the ""White House"" and the ""FAA HQ one mile SE"" text in it, with 4 to 6 miles from the White House. You'll see you end up somewhere in the first quadrant of that huge circling maneuver made by AAL77, south of the Potomac and above Virginia grounds, and not anywhere near DC grounds.
The only difference will be that you have to move the endpoint of your red line more downwards in your picture. Better said, the people who were looking out of those southern windows of the FAA headquarters, described perfectly their sighting of AAL77 still at more than 6,000 feet high, flying its first leg in the first quadrant of that huge circling back to the Pentagon's west wall.
I know where you get that C-130 DC Mall flight path from. CIT and PfT have discussed here years ago, that the C-130 departed from Andrews, made a 90° turn to follow a flight path under but parallel with the Mall, then crossed the Potomac much northerly than in the 80RADES radar data depicted. That all deducted from the words of O'Brien in his online video interview (Yes, at hindsight, you did not interview him, CIT put that video up at their site).
To fit the CIT video witness account from the Potomac sports fisherman Steve Chaconas.
The departure chart for Andrews ordered however a much sharper U-turn directly after take-off, to stay away from the two restricted P-zones. That takes the planes crossing the Potomac, right over or just south of Reagan International Airport, much more south of where Chaconas saw a plane crossing the river to the west. In such a case about right over his fishing boat.
That order for the Andrews U-turn is the logical one, since it leads departing military planes away from the 2 restricted airspace P-zones, and subsequently leads them right over the civilian airport, where all planes are either departing or landing in a very low flying attitude. Little risk of mid-air collisions in that air space over the airport.
Any civilian or military pilots negating that P-zones restricted path, loose their job, or their rank, if not ordered by flight controllers, or caused by engine failure or such major fatalities.
The FOIA release of the 80RADES radar data showed the C-130 path just south of R.Reagan Airport in their recorded radar charts. That is the true path, or we or you must be able to provide evidence that that radar data was tampered with. Until then, it is the true path.
You can see the FAA HQ building in the above picture. It's about a quarter mile from the Basin, the top water. Then you see in the middle the Potomac river water with the I-395 bridge to the right. Then you see the Pentagon boat harbor water at the bottom, in front of the Pentagon Riverside Entrance.
I think you understand that 6 miles from the White House is quite a distance more southeast than is depicted as the right bottom of this picture. And not on DC grounds. DC grounds are fully situated north of the Potomac river.
Addressing your third post after my last one :
reply to post by WetBlanky
CIT were the ones that for years used the argument that the second plane, the C-130, was used to confuse the hell out of all eventual eyewitnesses. So they would eventually mix it up with the AAL77 attack plane.
( Your quote : ""-Colin Scoggins (and Kevin Nesapany) place the/an unidentified plane SE & east of the White House/Potomac which only fits with the C-130 DC Mall flight path... "" )
No, it does not fit with the DC Mall C-130 flight path.
Which would be according to CIT, south of, and parallel to the Mall area in between the White House and the FAA building.
It does fit however the attack plane, AAL77, flying at that moment in the first quadrant of its huge circling maneuver above Virginia grounds, south of the Potomac river.
(Your quote : ""Scoggins: 4 to 6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.
Huntress:He's moving away? "". )
Do me a favor, extend that red line in your map with the ""White House"" and the ""FAA HQ one mile SE"" text in it, with 4 to 6 miles from the White House. You'll see you end up somewhere in the first quadrant of that huge circling maneuver made by AAL77, south of the Potomac and above Virginia grounds, and not anywhere near DC grounds.
The only difference will be that you have to move the endpoint of your red line more downwards in your picture. Better said, the people who were looking out of those southern windows of the FAA headquarters, described perfectly their sighting of AAL77 still at more than 6,000 feet high, flying its first leg in the first quadrant of that huge circling back to the Pentagon's west wall.
I know where you get that C-130 DC Mall flight path from. CIT and PfT have discussed here years ago, that the C-130 departed from Andrews, made a 90° turn to follow a flight path under but parallel with the Mall, then crossed the Potomac much northerly than in the 80RADES radar data depicted. That all deducted from the words of O'Brien in his online video interview (Yes, at hindsight, you did not interview him, CIT put that video up at their site).
To fit the CIT video witness account from the Potomac sports fisherman Steve Chaconas.
The departure chart for Andrews ordered however a much sharper U-turn directly after take-off, to stay away from the two restricted P-zones. That takes the planes crossing the Potomac, right over or just south of Reagan International Airport, much more south of where Chaconas saw a plane crossing the river to the west. In such a case about right over his fishing boat.
That order for the Andrews U-turn is the logical one, since it leads departing military planes away from the 2 restricted airspace P-zones, and subsequently leads them right over the civilian airport, where all planes are either departing or landing in a very low flying attitude. Little risk of mid-air collisions in that air space over the airport.
Any civilian or military pilots negating that P-zones restricted path, loose their job, or their rank, if not ordered by flight controllers, or caused by engine failure or such major fatalities.
The FOIA release of the 80RADES radar data showed the C-130 path just south of R.Reagan Airport in their recorded radar charts. That is the true path, or we or you must be able to provide evidence that that radar data was tampered with. Until then, it is the true path.
You can see the FAA HQ building in the above picture. It's about a quarter mile from the Basin, the top water. Then you see in the middle the Potomac river water with the I-395 bridge to the right. Then you see the Pentagon boat harbor water at the bottom, in front of the Pentagon Riverside Entrance.
I think you understand that 6 miles from the White House is quite a distance more southeast than is depicted as the right bottom of this picture. And not on DC grounds. DC grounds are fully situated north of the Potomac river.
Take a long ruler, align it with the west wall of the little green drawn Pentagon in this huge picture of the 80RADES radar returns for AAL77, and
then you see that the ruler crosses the two right quadrants of that huge circling maneuver. And the plane flies southeast from it.
These FAA HQ people looking southwards through their windows, saw AAL77 flying in the first and second quadrant. And they correctly reported it as flying southeast from them, about 4 to 6 miles away. See the 1mile/1 kilometer white reference lines at the far left bottom ! And then take that 1 mile reference between the legs of your pair of compasses, put the first pin at the White House, and repeat it 5 more times pin over pin, over that ruler. That's six miles southeast. Smack in the right center of that huge circle :
Ain't it interesting, these last pink colored radar returns 21 and 22. These pink ones in the left bottom list.
"They" explained it away that 21 was the lost, stray radar signal, shadow deflected between and by Crystal City high buildings towards a more northernly position, and thus not being returned in a straight line to the radar dish at Reagan Int, and thus covering a longer distance. Which is totally idiot, since there is another, last signal 22, recorded 11 seconds later than signal 21.
But just as far away from signal 20 as signal 21......!
We are however recording 24.7 seconds between signal 20 and 21, thus missing one last radar dish full circle revolution of about 12 seconds duration, see the pink bottom Elapsed time list data. That means the Crystal City buildings have blocked that lost and not recorded radar return signal between 20 and 21 ( let's call it "20+". )
There's 2 x 12 seconds = 24 normal radar dish revolutions radar return seconds between signal 21 and signal 20. (13:37:36.890 minus 13:37:12.190 = 24.700 seconds).
There's however 10.920, nearly 11 MOREseconds, between signal 22 and 21, but their positional data show they are very near to each other. Instead of about another mile further, as the preceding signals did show.
A normal radar researcher would have immediately disposed signal 22 off as irrational. And being the real stray radar shadow signal.
"They" however deducted that last signal 22 must be the real signal, since it is nearest to the official internal damage path of 60.25° true north.
They have no other proof than their proposed official flight path based on the downed light poles (staged by military agency) and the internal Pentagon damage path deducted in the Building Performance Report (staged by military agency) for this irrational assumption.
But we have : the NoC witnesses video taped by CIT !
And my NoC extra witnesses posted at my only long PfT forum thread, deducted by me from existing reports :
Post #37 (ASCE engineers team first allowed in the Pentagon internal crash site, on October 3, 2001).
And my Post #38, the additionally found Route 27 witnesses of a NoC flight path.
I repeat again, find Tony Terronez, and his pictures!
And my Post #39, and my Post #40 ones.
And those are nearly just as important as your CIT interviewed CITGO witnesses.
But CIT's William Lagasse is still my number one hero witness, I fully admit that indisputable fact. He convinced me immediately that something stinks in Washington.
These FAA HQ people looking southwards through their windows, saw AAL77 flying in the first and second quadrant. And they correctly reported it as flying southeast from them, about 4 to 6 miles away. See the 1mile/1 kilometer white reference lines at the far left bottom ! And then take that 1 mile reference between the legs of your pair of compasses, put the first pin at the White House, and repeat it 5 more times pin over pin, over that ruler. That's six miles southeast. Smack in the right center of that huge circle :
Ain't it interesting, these last pink colored radar returns 21 and 22. These pink ones in the left bottom list.
"They" explained it away that 21 was the lost, stray radar signal, shadow deflected between and by Crystal City high buildings towards a more northernly position, and thus not being returned in a straight line to the radar dish at Reagan Int, and thus covering a longer distance. Which is totally idiot, since there is another, last signal 22, recorded 11 seconds later than signal 21.
But just as far away from signal 20 as signal 21......!
We are however recording 24.7 seconds between signal 20 and 21, thus missing one last radar dish full circle revolution of about 12 seconds duration, see the pink bottom Elapsed time list data. That means the Crystal City buildings have blocked that lost and not recorded radar return signal between 20 and 21 ( let's call it "20+". )
There's 2 x 12 seconds = 24 normal radar dish revolutions radar return seconds between signal 21 and signal 20. (13:37:36.890 minus 13:37:12.190 = 24.700 seconds).
There's however 10.920, nearly 11 MOREseconds, between signal 22 and 21, but their positional data show they are very near to each other. Instead of about another mile further, as the preceding signals did show.
A normal radar researcher would have immediately disposed signal 22 off as irrational. And being the real stray radar shadow signal.
"They" however deducted that last signal 22 must be the real signal, since it is nearest to the official internal damage path of 60.25° true north.
They have no other proof than their proposed official flight path based on the downed light poles (staged by military agency) and the internal Pentagon damage path deducted in the Building Performance Report (staged by military agency) for this irrational assumption.
But we have : the NoC witnesses video taped by CIT !
And my NoC extra witnesses posted at my only long PfT forum thread, deducted by me from existing reports :
Post #37 (ASCE engineers team first allowed in the Pentagon internal crash site, on October 3, 2001).
And my Post #38, the additionally found Route 27 witnesses of a NoC flight path.
I repeat again, find Tony Terronez, and his pictures!
And my Post #39, and my Post #40 ones.
And those are nearly just as important as your CIT interviewed CITGO witnesses.
But CIT's William Lagasse is still my number one hero witness, I fully admit that indisputable fact. He convinced me immediately that something stinks in Washington.
Thus, why not reverse that same story, since we now have the NoC evidence, for that radar signal 22..?
Then radar signal 21, being the (more) straight radar signal bounced back from the plane back to the radar waves emitting dish on the south riverside end of the Reagan International Airport grounds, is showing exactly what the ANC workers described as seeing coming at them, and flying over them.
And is recorded at the right time, about 12 seconds after the preceding signal 20.
While signal 22 is recorded again nearly 11 seconds later than signal 21.
Which means that signal must have been bounced back from a plane flying a mile further EAST than the whole Pentagon building.
But the 80RADES positional data for that signal 22 is about as far away from signal 20, as signal 21 was.
THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE ! Two nearly identical positioned radar signals, bouncing back from the same plane, but with a difference in time of about 11 seconds.
One signal must be FALSE, thus inserted. I think it's signal 22, no doubt about that.
Or, the positional date for that last signal 22 must be FALSE. Then showing without doubt that there was an over-fly.
Which is also irrational because we have about everyone able to see an impact, also reported seeing an impact. So the fly-over option is a very small one.
But existing until we know for sure that the radar data was changed, to fit the 60.25° flightpath in the last 10 seconds.
This anomaly combined with the NoC witness evidence for a much slower flying plane, banking in a 20 to 30° right bank which does not cooperate with these 80RADES radar data, leads to the conclusion that the 80 RADES data is tampered with, probably from the signal 16 point on. That's the strange dip of the 105 MPH slower flown track (236.027 MPH) of 4098 feet long (1249 meters, 1.25 KM).
I am still open for any other logical explanatory interpretation for radar signal 21 and 22.
Then radar signal 21, being the (more) straight radar signal bounced back from the plane back to the radar waves emitting dish on the south riverside end of the Reagan International Airport grounds, is showing exactly what the ANC workers described as seeing coming at them, and flying over them.
And is recorded at the right time, about 12 seconds after the preceding signal 20.
While signal 22 is recorded again nearly 11 seconds later than signal 21.
Which means that signal must have been bounced back from a plane flying a mile further EAST than the whole Pentagon building.
But the 80RADES positional data for that signal 22 is about as far away from signal 20, as signal 21 was.
THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE ! Two nearly identical positioned radar signals, bouncing back from the same plane, but with a difference in time of about 11 seconds.
One signal must be FALSE, thus inserted. I think it's signal 22, no doubt about that.
Or, the positional date for that last signal 22 must be FALSE. Then showing without doubt that there was an over-fly.
Which is also irrational because we have about everyone able to see an impact, also reported seeing an impact. So the fly-over option is a very small one.
But existing until we know for sure that the radar data was changed, to fit the 60.25° flightpath in the last 10 seconds.
This anomaly combined with the NoC witness evidence for a much slower flying plane, banking in a 20 to 30° right bank which does not cooperate with these 80RADES radar data, leads to the conclusion that the 80 RADES data is tampered with, probably from the signal 16 point on. That's the strange dip of the 105 MPH slower flown track (236.027 MPH) of 4098 feet long (1249 meters, 1.25 KM).
I am still open for any other logical explanatory interpretation for radar signal 21 and 22.
Roosevelt Roberts :
Please read my
Post #60 and
Post #61 and
Post #62
Post #64 is also a fine example of Balsamo not willing to accept that online bank angle calculator. I just proved a few pages back, that the CIT witnesses who all saw a 20 to 30° right banking slow flying plane, can be perfectly right in their observations.
But Balsamo says in his last lines in that short post, that ""A slower speed will cause an accelerated stall.""
Use the online calculator I posted a few pages back, and insert a 220 MPH speed and a 22° bank, and a 180 MPH stall speed, known to belong to a 757-200.
No accelerated stall. Plus, an accelerated stall is of no importance when the plane has less than one second left before it impacts. A stall needs more time to develop into a crash.
Please read my
Post #60 and
Post #61 and
Post #62
Post #64 is also a fine example of Balsamo not willing to accept that online bank angle calculator. I just proved a few pages back, that the CIT witnesses who all saw a 20 to 30° right banking slow flying plane, can be perfectly right in their observations.
But Balsamo says in his last lines in that short post, that ""A slower speed will cause an accelerated stall.""
Use the online calculator I posted a few pages back, and insert a 220 MPH speed and a 22° bank, and a 180 MPH stall speed, known to belong to a 757-200.
No accelerated stall. Plus, an accelerated stall is of no importance when the plane has less than one second left before it impacts. A stall needs more time to develop into a crash.
reply to post by WetBlanky
Addressing your second post after my last 26 Nov post :
""WB : Well although I accept that it could be the c-130 there is an equal chance it could be the flyover plane. From that perspective it would look like a plane coming out of a cloud. That black smoke cloud formed very quickly, just watch the surveillance video.""
No, it took at least one minute, probably more.
Because the C-130 flew at the top of that mushroom cloud, and not over the initial carbon fuel explosion cloud, which was no more than hundred meters high. This mushroom cloud was 1 minute later 1000 meter high, and then came the C-130 in the first picture's right hand side.
You do realize that we have photo's from the C-130 crossing in front of the smoke column, at a height of about 1000 meters high?
Are you proposing that it could be mistaken for your fly-over plane which you proposed flew within a few tenth of feet over the roof rim of the Pentagon west wall, piercing through that smoke column developed after the impact (you do not accept), which took about 60 seconds or more to develop, according to multiple sources, like the AC controller room to C-130 tapes, the Radar tapes regarding the C-130, the photo's, the video shot from the I-395, do I need to give more?
""WB : The plane is on the north side of the Citgo, therefore it did not hit the pentagon. Not only was it on the north side of the Citgo, but it "pulled up" or started to "pivot up" over the highway. That is wholly indicative of a flyover as well. ""
You, neither I are experienced 757 pilots. But I think I understand the flight physics involved better. I am convinced that it is possible to hit.
You know why ? See my links to my Route 27 witnesses, who stood no more than a hundred meters from that impact. Impossible to miss it, or to be fooled with a slight of hand explosion and fly-over. Mr Levi stood beside the impact, with a perfect view on it, in South Parking's Lane One area, where he just had parked his car, and was walking to the Pentagon entrance.
He would be your main fly-over witness.
Ask him again what he saw.....
Or Penny Elgas. Do not forget to ask this time where her car was jammed in Route 27 traffic.
Do ask Christine Peterson again. She already said she stood "in front of the HELIPAD". Do you want to have it told to you more explicit than that? Then for gods sake, ask her again.
Then you get the chain of custody rule.
When Christine stood there and said the plane came right over her head, the plane could never ever have taken the 60.25° flight path. PERIOD !
Then start adding up all my linked to Route 27 witnesses, who all said that they stood only a few cars behind where the plane crossed (thus near the Helipad! ). Quite a few, ain't it?
Review on top of that the Steve Riskus photo's, he had btw a perfect view from where he drove and saw the plane cross (he agreed with an Italian photo op, depicting the 757 crossing low over Route 27, exactly in a slight nose down attitude expected for a following impact. A fly-over would be at a higher height, and in nose-up attitude. That plane in that Italian photo-op can not ever recover from that nose down attitude within 100 meters that the lawn is wide there.
""WB : Very wrong. Perhaps he missed it while he was BUSY WORKING, but it flew over DC skies. I love how you pretty much masquerade as a truther but basically parrot the official story.""
I just proved you terribly wrong with my above link to that huge radar data map.
""WB : CIT on DC flight path: ""
I do not want to spent more time on those quotes, the huge radar map above should give you a link where their misconceptions originated from. Fleischer talks about the flight path preceding the first rader return signal 1 you see on my posted map. And yes, at that time it looked as if they aimed for the White House. But then they started that huge circling south of the Potomac.
ATC Danielle O'Brien (family of Steve O'Brien, the C-130 pilot? Worth checking) said :
""WB quote : she says. "And I think that they came eastbound and because sun was in their eyes that morning, and because the White House was beyond a grove of trees, I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them.""
Exactly what we see in my huge radar linked map above.
But.... just before point 1. You must not extend that first track length from 1 to 2.
The preceding path curved down, south wards. And in that path, they seemed to aim at the White House, but at point 1 they changed course.
Col. Deskins, a female military radar controller in the New York radar room saw this :
""WB quote : -and she very SPECIFICALLY describes the last maneuver of the plane. whats KEY in her exact quote is this (bolded)
"we caught, on the radar scope, a few blips, maybe 7 or 8 (hands showing the spiral maneuver motion in correspondence with these radar dots), just enough to kinda go around in a half circle and then fade, eh - losing radar contact - RIGHT OVER um, WASHINGTON.""
We later got the 80RADES data, and as you can see in my huge above plotted data, it where not 7 or 8 blips, but 22. Because that 80RADES report used a combination of all available radar records, especially the one from the R.Reagan International Airport radar dish.
Do you want a photo of it, and a map to show you where it is situated?
And on a radar screen in New York, it looks as if the last blip is nearly over Washington, on the day of 9/11. But the later, combined one shows the exact positions, see the left bottom list with the EXACT longitudes and latitudes.
And yes, I do not believe that anybody in his right mind goes falsification a whole radar report, when he only had to change signal 22's position, to match the 60.25° flight path, that's btw the SoC path.
And I just showed you the problem with it. He forgot to change the time. It trailed 11 seconds after signal 21, the right one, the NoC one.
Addressing your second post after my last 26 Nov post :
""WB : Well although I accept that it could be the c-130 there is an equal chance it could be the flyover plane. From that perspective it would look like a plane coming out of a cloud. That black smoke cloud formed very quickly, just watch the surveillance video.""
No, it took at least one minute, probably more.
Because the C-130 flew at the top of that mushroom cloud, and not over the initial carbon fuel explosion cloud, which was no more than hundred meters high. This mushroom cloud was 1 minute later 1000 meter high, and then came the C-130 in the first picture's right hand side.
You do realize that we have photo's from the C-130 crossing in front of the smoke column, at a height of about 1000 meters high?
Are you proposing that it could be mistaken for your fly-over plane which you proposed flew within a few tenth of feet over the roof rim of the Pentagon west wall, piercing through that smoke column developed after the impact (you do not accept), which took about 60 seconds or more to develop, according to multiple sources, like the AC controller room to C-130 tapes, the Radar tapes regarding the C-130, the photo's, the video shot from the I-395, do I need to give more?
""WB : The plane is on the north side of the Citgo, therefore it did not hit the pentagon. Not only was it on the north side of the Citgo, but it "pulled up" or started to "pivot up" over the highway. That is wholly indicative of a flyover as well. ""
You, neither I are experienced 757 pilots. But I think I understand the flight physics involved better. I am convinced that it is possible to hit.
You know why ? See my links to my Route 27 witnesses, who stood no more than a hundred meters from that impact. Impossible to miss it, or to be fooled with a slight of hand explosion and fly-over. Mr Levi stood beside the impact, with a perfect view on it, in South Parking's Lane One area, where he just had parked his car, and was walking to the Pentagon entrance.
He would be your main fly-over witness.
Ask him again what he saw.....
Or Penny Elgas. Do not forget to ask this time where her car was jammed in Route 27 traffic.
Do ask Christine Peterson again. She already said she stood "in front of the HELIPAD". Do you want to have it told to you more explicit than that? Then for gods sake, ask her again.
Then you get the chain of custody rule.
When Christine stood there and said the plane came right over her head, the plane could never ever have taken the 60.25° flight path. PERIOD !
Then start adding up all my linked to Route 27 witnesses, who all said that they stood only a few cars behind where the plane crossed (thus near the Helipad! ). Quite a few, ain't it?
Review on top of that the Steve Riskus photo's, he had btw a perfect view from where he drove and saw the plane cross (he agreed with an Italian photo op, depicting the 757 crossing low over Route 27, exactly in a slight nose down attitude expected for a following impact. A fly-over would be at a higher height, and in nose-up attitude. That plane in that Italian photo-op can not ever recover from that nose down attitude within 100 meters that the lawn is wide there.
""WB : Very wrong. Perhaps he missed it while he was BUSY WORKING, but it flew over DC skies. I love how you pretty much masquerade as a truther but basically parrot the official story.""
I just proved you terribly wrong with my above link to that huge radar data map.
""WB : CIT on DC flight path: ""
I do not want to spent more time on those quotes, the huge radar map above should give you a link where their misconceptions originated from. Fleischer talks about the flight path preceding the first rader return signal 1 you see on my posted map. And yes, at that time it looked as if they aimed for the White House. But then they started that huge circling south of the Potomac.
ATC Danielle O'Brien (family of Steve O'Brien, the C-130 pilot? Worth checking) said :
""WB quote : she says. "And I think that they came eastbound and because sun was in their eyes that morning, and because the White House was beyond a grove of trees, I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them.""
Exactly what we see in my huge radar linked map above.
But.... just before point 1. You must not extend that first track length from 1 to 2.
The preceding path curved down, south wards. And in that path, they seemed to aim at the White House, but at point 1 they changed course.
Col. Deskins, a female military radar controller in the New York radar room saw this :
""WB quote : -and she very SPECIFICALLY describes the last maneuver of the plane. whats KEY in her exact quote is this (bolded)
"we caught, on the radar scope, a few blips, maybe 7 or 8 (hands showing the spiral maneuver motion in correspondence with these radar dots), just enough to kinda go around in a half circle and then fade, eh - losing radar contact - RIGHT OVER um, WASHINGTON.""
We later got the 80RADES data, and as you can see in my huge above plotted data, it where not 7 or 8 blips, but 22. Because that 80RADES report used a combination of all available radar records, especially the one from the R.Reagan International Airport radar dish.
Do you want a photo of it, and a map to show you where it is situated?
And on a radar screen in New York, it looks as if the last blip is nearly over Washington, on the day of 9/11. But the later, combined one shows the exact positions, see the left bottom list with the EXACT longitudes and latitudes.
And yes, I do not believe that anybody in his right mind goes falsification a whole radar report, when he only had to change signal 22's position, to match the 60.25° flight path, that's btw the SoC path.
And I just showed you the problem with it. He forgot to change the time. It trailed 11 seconds after signal 21, the right one, the NoC one.
reply to post by WetBlanky
Addressing your fourth post after my yesterday posts.
Yep, you, nor CIT have interviewed Steve O'Brien, I mixed the video link on CIT's site of that interview up with them doing that, which they did not. Does that trigger your need to insult me? Learn to control yourself and your anger.
""WB : Sure. But the guy on top of the building could have seen the flyover as well, as the flyover plane did a u turn to the mall entrance side of the plane, which is in the same direction as Dulles. Did you talk to "americanjock30"? No you didn't. So you don't know what he saw exactly. ""
No, Roosevelt Roberts said something different. The (first) plane he saw coming in low over the Annex and crossing Route 27 flew in the direction of the Mall Entrance, not the second plane, which he saw, which was the C-130.
His words prove you wrong, he said this (see my Post #61 ) :
""LT translation of Aldo's phone call with RR :
-- right as you hung up the phone, you, you ran outside. Which parking lot, which dock were you are?
R.R. : ""I was in South Parking, and I was at the east loading dock, when I ran outside and saw the low flying aircraft above the parking lot."
OK. Was it uhh.. was it uhh.. a jet, or was it uhh.., do you remember what kind of plane it was?
RR: (52:50) Uhh.., it looked like to me at that time, uhh.., a large uhh... aircraft liner. It wasn't.., it wasn't a jet, it was a commercial aircraft...
Ok, did it have propellers or did it have jet engines...?
RR: It looked like jet engines at that time.. -- ""
Good. That's definitely AAL77 he describes there, flying LOW. You agree the C-130 flew HIGH ? Like you can see in the "opposite riverbank" photos? Ok, then we snip over a lot of text to arrive at the heart of the matter. Remember, all that first text clearly addressed the first low incoming AAL77.
""Further Post #61 quotes :
""OK. Do you remember which direction it was headed?""
RR: Uhh.., coming from the uhh.. 27 side, 27 heading uhh.., uhh.. eastern DC, coming from that area, uhh.. it was the Highway. If you would have come up through 395, uhh.. to the north end of the Pentagon you got off into South Parking. You would be, like right there, uhh.. 395 goes right into 27.
(LT: Roosevelt can not be more precise than this, he describes here AA 77 coming from the area between the Sheraton Hotel and Route 395 in a direction towards him and the Pentagon, and further descending towards Route 27. It's clear he saw it at that moment still as far as the Navy Annex or the CITGO gas station, because he indicates it "heading eastern DC", which Route 27 is heading at the north of the Pentagon. But he saw it in the distant airspace "above" the junction of 395 to 27.)
--MORE-
Addressing your fourth post after my yesterday posts.
Yep, you, nor CIT have interviewed Steve O'Brien, I mixed the video link on CIT's site of that interview up with them doing that, which they did not. Does that trigger your need to insult me? Learn to control yourself and your anger.
""WB : Sure. But the guy on top of the building could have seen the flyover as well, as the flyover plane did a u turn to the mall entrance side of the plane, which is in the same direction as Dulles. Did you talk to "americanjock30"? No you didn't. So you don't know what he saw exactly. ""
No, Roosevelt Roberts said something different. The (first) plane he saw coming in low over the Annex and crossing Route 27 flew in the direction of the Mall Entrance, not the second plane, which he saw, which was the C-130.
His words prove you wrong, he said this (see my Post #61 ) :
""LT translation of Aldo's phone call with RR :
-- right as you hung up the phone, you, you ran outside. Which parking lot, which dock were you are?
R.R. : ""I was in South Parking, and I was at the east loading dock, when I ran outside and saw the low flying aircraft above the parking lot."
OK. Was it uhh.. was it uhh.. a jet, or was it uhh.., do you remember what kind of plane it was?
RR: (52:50) Uhh.., it looked like to me at that time, uhh.., a large uhh... aircraft liner. It wasn't.., it wasn't a jet, it was a commercial aircraft...
Ok, did it have propellers or did it have jet engines...?
RR: It looked like jet engines at that time.. -- ""
Good. That's definitely AAL77 he describes there, flying LOW. You agree the C-130 flew HIGH ? Like you can see in the "opposite riverbank" photos? Ok, then we snip over a lot of text to arrive at the heart of the matter. Remember, all that first text clearly addressed the first low incoming AAL77.
""Further Post #61 quotes :
""OK. Do you remember which direction it was headed?""
RR: Uhh.., coming from the uhh.. 27 side, 27 heading uhh.., uhh.. eastern DC, coming from that area, uhh.. it was the Highway. If you would have come up through 395, uhh.. to the north end of the Pentagon you got off into South Parking. You would be, like right there, uhh.. 395 goes right into 27.
(LT: Roosevelt can not be more precise than this, he describes here AA 77 coming from the area between the Sheraton Hotel and Route 395 in a direction towards him and the Pentagon, and further descending towards Route 27. It's clear he saw it at that moment still as far as the Navy Annex or the CITGO gas station, because he indicates it "heading eastern DC", which Route 27 is heading at the north of the Pentagon. But he saw it in the distant airspace "above" the junction of 395 to 27.)
--MORE-
And then in his next question, Aldo confused the hell out of the poor guy, by suddenly switching to a plane heading AWAY from the Pentagon, which in
the mind of RR can only be the C-130, which indeed headed away to the west after circling in front of the smoke column. And Roosevelt shows in this,
years after 9/11, interview to know or have learned quite well about that C-130; however, so to hear, in fact had witnessed personally how it followed
AA 77, came flying to, turning in front, and leaving the Pentagon area again, back in about the same direction as it came to it, just a bit more to
the northwest.)
So, from where it headed away from the Pentagon, which direction was it heading?
RR: From the, UHH???!!............???.... Can you repeat that one more time please!
Yeah, when it was heading away from the Pentagon...this second plane, do you remember.....
RR: WHY??
Do you remember which direction it was heading?
RR: The..uhh.., it was heading, uhm.., back across 27....and it looks like..., it appeared to me, I was in the south, and that plane was heading, like...uhhh, southwest.., coming out.
So like banking around, turning back around?
RR: Corr-rect... (LT: in a doubting tone)
OK....
RR: Banking. Banking around, coming back out turning southwest, and going straight across...
OK.So,..
RR: And then it...
(LT: If you had let him speak out, Aldo, you would have RR probably heard adding :""turned around back across (over) Route 27"", because that's what he was saying before.)
OK, did it look like it went over the river and kind of turned around?
RR: Uhh... It looked like it went over on the Mall Entrance side and turned around, because you got.. the Mall there, and then, where I was at south, and the plane from the direction of the city and was facing west, so it went southwest, away from the Pentagon.
(LT: here Roosevelt again clearly described the C-130's descending, coming towards him, then the U-turning in the northern front of the smoke column, then flying back up and out again, to the southwest. Back to his home or designation Air Guard airport.
Maneuvers actually flown by that military C-130 freight plane with 4 turbo-propeller engines, but which he identified wrongly as a second, 2 or 4 jet engines commercial plane. Remember, this interview is years after 9/11, RR had time enough to read about the C-130 story.
But hearing him describe the above, it sounds like he in reality saw that C-130 with his own eyes.
Btw, the C-130 flew much higher, we have 4 photo's of it (taken by a man at the DC shore side of the Potomac), turning high in the sky, just in front of the Pentagon smoke column.)
South..southwest away from the Pentagon. OK, So kind of did it U-turned it away?
RR: WHY???
OK. Uhh.., ok..
RR: (57:00) It banked down as why U-turning and coming around and coming out, it looked like, uhhh..for a few seconds it looked like as if uhhh.., how I'm gonna say it, uhh.., it missed the wrong target. Going like out of the way like back to the airport or something like that...
ALL-right, so it was heading towards the airport it looked like?
RR: Well no, not heading towards the airport, it's almost like if uhh.., if a pilot missed his target, he'll try to do a banking and come around because he missed the target he missed the landing zone.
Got-it, got-it.""
--MORE--
So, from where it headed away from the Pentagon, which direction was it heading?
RR: From the, UHH???!!............???.... Can you repeat that one more time please!
Yeah, when it was heading away from the Pentagon...this second plane, do you remember.....
RR: WHY??
Do you remember which direction it was heading?
RR: The..uhh.., it was heading, uhm.., back across 27....and it looks like..., it appeared to me, I was in the south, and that plane was heading, like...uhhh, southwest.., coming out.
So like banking around, turning back around?
RR: Corr-rect... (LT: in a doubting tone)
OK....
RR: Banking. Banking around, coming back out turning southwest, and going straight across...
OK.So,..
RR: And then it...
(LT: If you had let him speak out, Aldo, you would have RR probably heard adding :""turned around back across (over) Route 27"", because that's what he was saying before.)
OK, did it look like it went over the river and kind of turned around?
RR: Uhh... It looked like it went over on the Mall Entrance side and turned around, because you got.. the Mall there, and then, where I was at south, and the plane from the direction of the city and was facing west, so it went southwest, away from the Pentagon.
(LT: here Roosevelt again clearly described the C-130's descending, coming towards him, then the U-turning in the northern front of the smoke column, then flying back up and out again, to the southwest. Back to his home or designation Air Guard airport.
Maneuvers actually flown by that military C-130 freight plane with 4 turbo-propeller engines, but which he identified wrongly as a second, 2 or 4 jet engines commercial plane. Remember, this interview is years after 9/11, RR had time enough to read about the C-130 story.
But hearing him describe the above, it sounds like he in reality saw that C-130 with his own eyes.
Btw, the C-130 flew much higher, we have 4 photo's of it (taken by a man at the DC shore side of the Potomac), turning high in the sky, just in front of the Pentagon smoke column.)
South..southwest away from the Pentagon. OK, So kind of did it U-turned it away?
RR: WHY???
OK. Uhh.., ok..
RR: (57:00) It banked down as why U-turning and coming around and coming out, it looked like, uhhh..for a few seconds it looked like as if uhhh.., how I'm gonna say it, uhh.., it missed the wrong target. Going like out of the way like back to the airport or something like that...
ALL-right, so it was heading towards the airport it looked like?
RR: Well no, not heading towards the airport, it's almost like if uhh.., if a pilot missed his target, he'll try to do a banking and come around because he missed the target he missed the landing zone.
Got-it, got-it.""
--MORE--
The key problem with what happened there is this next first sentence by Aldo, who wants to sacrifice his right hand when he could get
a fly-over witness agreeing with him, at the time of that interview, and that is what has confused the hell out of RR and all the CIT
fans
"" So, from where it headed away from the Pentagon, which direction was it heading.?
RR: From the, UHH???!! ............???.... Can you repeat that one more time please!
Yeah, when it was heading away from the Pentagon...this second plane, do you remember.....
RR: WHY?? ""
Read my link to my full Post #61 text, Roosevelt just ended again a long sentence in which he perfectly described AAL77, and then suddenly Aldo switches to a plane which "headed away" from the Pentagon, and asked where that OTHER plane went to.
While RR just explained to him that the first plane went TOWARDS the Pentagon.
Of course, in the fly-over opinion mind-set of Aldo, he desperately wants the same FIRST plane to head away again from the Pentagon, after a fly-over, but RR does not know that at all, so he's very confused and expressed that confusion by saying UHH, WHY and uhh, until he thinks he understands Aldo when Aldo says (after RR ask him to repeat the question again) "away from the Pentagon...this second plane", and thus RR starts then to talk about the C-130, the second plane he witnessed, but high in the sky, and describing exactly its flight attitude.
In the next sentence, RR clearly shows us where he was : "I was in the south", and thus not in the east, at that small Eastern Loading, Aldo lately wants us to believe he was at.
Because he thinks that fits his own whole RR fly-over conviction much better than the real RR position at the eastern loading dock area from the South Loading, in the South Parking area.
Read the full #61 post, and you understand it immediately. Aldo was desperately trying to lead RR to commit to the first plane (AA77) making a huge U-turn, and returning back through the smoke column as the second plane.
But that is insane, since the real second plane (C-130) never flew through the smoke column but turned in front of its top, and did not come back from over the Pentagon, but was also coming towards it, just as AAL77 a minute before. (See the river bank set of photos! )
O'Brien only had the task to report back to his flight controller at Andrews, that he now saw where the first plane (AA77) had hit the Pentagon, and then sharply turned to steer back to his home base.
RR also perfectly described in his next explanations, that the C-130 was coming towards the Mall Entrance side, turned and then from his SOUTH position seemed then AFTER that turn, to come "from the direction of the city, and was facing west, so it went southwest, away from the Pentagon."
While you at it, read Post #62 too. More RR explanation.
--MORE--
"" So, from where it headed away from the Pentagon, which direction was it heading.?
RR: From the, UHH???!! ............???.... Can you repeat that one more time please!
Yeah, when it was heading away from the Pentagon...this second plane, do you remember.....
RR: WHY?? ""
Read my link to my full Post #61 text, Roosevelt just ended again a long sentence in which he perfectly described AAL77, and then suddenly Aldo switches to a plane which "headed away" from the Pentagon, and asked where that OTHER plane went to.
While RR just explained to him that the first plane went TOWARDS the Pentagon.
Of course, in the fly-over opinion mind-set of Aldo, he desperately wants the same FIRST plane to head away again from the Pentagon, after a fly-over, but RR does not know that at all, so he's very confused and expressed that confusion by saying UHH, WHY and uhh, until he thinks he understands Aldo when Aldo says (after RR ask him to repeat the question again) "away from the Pentagon...this second plane", and thus RR starts then to talk about the C-130, the second plane he witnessed, but high in the sky, and describing exactly its flight attitude.
In the next sentence, RR clearly shows us where he was : "I was in the south", and thus not in the east, at that small Eastern Loading, Aldo lately wants us to believe he was at.
Because he thinks that fits his own whole RR fly-over conviction much better than the real RR position at the eastern loading dock area from the South Loading, in the South Parking area.
Read the full #61 post, and you understand it immediately. Aldo was desperately trying to lead RR to commit to the first plane (AA77) making a huge U-turn, and returning back through the smoke column as the second plane.
But that is insane, since the real second plane (C-130) never flew through the smoke column but turned in front of its top, and did not come back from over the Pentagon, but was also coming towards it, just as AAL77 a minute before. (See the river bank set of photos! )
O'Brien only had the task to report back to his flight controller at Andrews, that he now saw where the first plane (AA77) had hit the Pentagon, and then sharply turned to steer back to his home base.
RR also perfectly described in his next explanations, that the C-130 was coming towards the Mall Entrance side, turned and then from his SOUTH position seemed then AFTER that turn, to come "from the direction of the city, and was facing west, so it went southwest, away from the Pentagon."
While you at it, read Post #62 too. More RR explanation.
--MORE--
Honestly, I can not understand that anybody in a neutral mindset will misunderstand that RR in that Aldo Marquis interview clearly describes two
different planes, and not one and the same plane, returning through a smoke column after a fly-over maneuver which never took
place.
RR : ""Yes sir, that's not what I think, it was two aircrafts, yes. For sure..! ""
RR : ""almost like where the first plane hit, so uhh.., it looked like.., it looked like it came from that direction.""
Aldo : ""ALL-right, so it was heading towards the airport it looked like? ""
RR : ""Well no, not heading towards the airport, it's almost like if uhh.., if a pilot missed his target, he'll try to do a banking and come around because he missed the target he missed the landing zone.""
Aldo : ""Got-it, got-it.""
No he did not got it, because he tried to use that RR sentence later on to cover his fly-over theory. But the man clearly told him the plane he just described (C-130) did not aim (heading) towards the only airport near there, R.Reagan International Airport, but instead ""was U-turning and coming around"". ""Going like out of the way like back to the airport or something like that..."" With the airport he meant of course the airport where he originated from. Note that RR at that moment had no clue at all what that high flying C-130 came doing.
--END--
RR : ""Yes sir, that's not what I think, it was two aircrafts, yes. For sure..! ""
RR : ""almost like where the first plane hit, so uhh.., it looked like.., it looked like it came from that direction.""
Aldo : ""ALL-right, so it was heading towards the airport it looked like? ""
RR : ""Well no, not heading towards the airport, it's almost like if uhh.., if a pilot missed his target, he'll try to do a banking and come around because he missed the target he missed the landing zone.""
Aldo : ""Got-it, got-it.""
No he did not got it, because he tried to use that RR sentence later on to cover his fly-over theory. But the man clearly told him the plane he just described (C-130) did not aim (heading) towards the only airport near there, R.Reagan International Airport, but instead ""was U-turning and coming around"". ""Going like out of the way like back to the airport or something like that..."" With the airport he meant of course the airport where he originated from. Note that RR at that moment had no clue at all what that high flying C-130 came doing.
--END--
new topics
-
Federal law trumps state and local law every time
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 4 hours ago
top topics
-
Federal law trumps state and local law every time
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 4 hours ago, 10 flags
active topics
-
The Acronym Game .. Pt.4
General Chit Chat • 992 • : Moon68 -
The Reactionary Conspiracy 13. The plot’s theology.
General Conspiracies • 310 • : andy06shake -
Federal law trumps state and local law every time
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 14 • : BeyondKnowledge3 -
Interesting Video-UFO?
Aliens and UFOs • 14 • : BeyondKnowledge3 -
Ed Dowd some good news
Medical Issues & Conspiracies • 39 • : chr0naut -
Post A Funny (T&C Friendly) Pic Part IV: The LOL awakens!
General Chit Chat • 7829 • : KrustyKrab -
I thought Trump was the existential threat?
World War Three • 74 • : PorkChop96 -
DOJ Special Counsel Robert HUR Says JOE BIDEN Can Be ARRESTED After Jan 20th 2025.
Above Politics • 20 • : Flyingclaydisk -
Well, here we go red lines crossed Biden gives the go ahead to use long range missiles
World War Three • 373 • : bastion -
Petition Calling for General Election at 564,016 and rising Fast
Political Issues • 90 • : gortex