Route 27 Witnesses POV Of Flight Path.

I thought about the traffic jam...

What if Lloyd's cab and downed lightpole that "supposedly" hit him were staged and that is why firetrucks were coming to his aid at the time the plane was coming in on a clean sweep to the Pentagon? Maybe Lloyd was the cause of this traffic jam, giving them time to down the lightpoles? Or were people closer to the poles than I think they were?

"Don Fortunato
“Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.” "

Witness list

[edit on 21-3-2007 by BigMoser]

Originally posted by LaBTop

1. Can you provide statements of the first, most northerly, 3 witnesses with free impact view, you named in your following picture :

2. Did you manage to find the origin of the traffic jam on Route 27 ?
I read there was an "accident" somewhere there, and the 2 fire trucks arriving within 3 minutes after official impact, were actually on their way to that accident. That's why they were the first on the scene.
Or was it just stuck by digestion on the rest of the roads?

3. Were both lanes stuck ?

4. Why do you project your blue line directly above the second, northerly positioned, southbound half of Route 27 spanning traffic signs board ?
That one only spans the southbound lanes, btw.
Is there a solid reason to do so ?
Because if so, your reasoning of a fly over gains much more weight, since we know that board did not get hit, and the only way for a plane missing that one, is to dive from above, over that sign. And all three of your eyewitnesses say, the plane they saw north of Citgo, flew straight and level.

1. I could but I am too busy as usual. Google them bro. They'll come up for sure!

2. We have not been able to find a definitive cause for this and we have looked. We checked with the police and fire dispatch and I asked Brooks and Lagasse. If it was blocked somehow it was hidden from "the books". But maybe it wasn't even blocked. In fact Daryl Donnelly claims that traffic "came to a stop" so for all we know accounts of it already being at a stand-still are false. Joel Sucherman told us there was nothing that caused it and it was just normal heavy traffic.

3. No. The southbound lane, Lloyd's lane, was clear.

4. It simply crosses over because that is where the straight lines extended meet. No reason for doing so. But yes.....none of the objects in the way of the north of citgo flight path were touched. Plus Robert literally saw the plane "pull up" to miss that stuff. Obviously this is HUGE evidence for a flyover.

This image depicts the poles that were and weren't hit in relation to the wingspan of a 757.




This is why the poles couldn't have been downed by the "blast" or wing vortices because none of the surrounding poles were downed.

Only the ones that match up perfectly with the physical damage flight path.

Originally posted by BigMoser
I thought about the traffic jam...

What if Lloyd's cab and downed lightpole that "supposedly" hit him were staged and that is why firetrucks were coming to his aid at the time the plane was coming in on a clean sweep to the Pentagon? Maybe Lloyd was the cause of this traffic jam, giving them time to down the lightpoles? Or were people closer to the poles than I think they were?

"Don Fortunato
“Traffic was at a standstill, so I parked on the shoulder, not far from the scene and ran to the site. Next to me was a cab from D.C., its windshield smashed out by pieces of lampposts. There were pieces of the plane all over the highway, pieces of wing, I think.” "

Witness list


[edit on 21-3-2007 by BigMoser]

I seriously doubt that Lloyd and the pole were placed before the explosion. That would create attention.

But nobody would notice the poles if they were already removed.

It just makes the most sense to me that everything was set up in advance and the pre-damaged cab and pole number one were placed just after the explosion.

Obviously we can only speculate about these types of details.

"Owens, Mary Ann
Mary Ann Owens, a journalist with Gannett News Service . . . was driving along by the side of the Pentagon, on September 11, 2001, when a hijacked jet screamed overhead and ploughed into it. . . .
Looking up didn't tell me what type of plane it was because it was so close I could only see the bottom. Realising the Pentagon was its target, I didn't think the careering, full-throttled craft would get that far. Its downward angle was too sharp, its elevation of maybe 50 feet, too low. Street lights toppled as the plane barely cleared the Interstate 395 overpass. . . .
Gripping the steering wheel of my vibrating car, I involuntarily ducked as the wobbling plane thundered over my head. Once it passed, I raised slightly and grimaced as the left wing dipped and scraped the helicopter area just before the nose crashed into the southwest wall of the Pentagon. "

Witness



"Owens, Mary Ann

Gannett News Service employee Mary Ann Owens was stopped in traffic on the road that runs past the Pentagon, listening on the radio to the news of the World Trade Center attacks, when she heard a loud roar overhead and looked up as the plane barely cleared the highway. "Instantly I knew what was happening, and I involuntarily ducked as the plane passed perhaps 50 to 75 feet above the roof of my car at great speed," Owens said. "The plane slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon. The impact was deafening. The fuselage hit the ground and blew up." "

Witness site 2

[edit on 21-3-2007 by BigMoser]

She's an OS'er obviously.

(official story supporter)


Why are all the best accounts in support of the official story at the Pentagon always either USA Today/Gannett or PenRen (Pentagon Renovation) employees?

Hmmm?

And then of course you have Lloyd the cab driver.

Just a little bit suspicious?

Quite obviously.

It reads like a script.

You got that damn right Jack.. would you be so descriptive of the attack? I think not!


"Oh it did this (Insert big dictionary descriptive words here for the remainder of the account).. I was so shocked!"

Thanks for the info. I'll have to look closer at the agles, the trees, and method of exact witness location (you seem to have better info on that than I)
Qs: People north of the trajectory couldn't see it becuase it was behind them? Motorists are supposed to be able to see back - rearview mirrors. Also they had necks. Heads can turn when hearing a jet engine. They're at a disadvantage, sure, but couldn't they see it if they tried?
USA Today: Most witnesses I've seen metion being in the HOV lane. Car pool, van pool. Is it ruled out that these guys were all in th same USA Today van? That's what I always guessed, but I don't know for sure...

I don't know what to think of any big journalistic companies.. they all tell things in very descriptive manners, like a story. I don't like that. Doesn't sound real.

Originally posted by Caustic Logic

Qs: People north of the trajectory couldn't see it becuase it was behind them? Motorists are supposed to be able to see back - rearview mirrors. Also they had necks. Heads can turn when hearing a jet engine. They're at a disadvantage, sure, but couldn't they see it if they tried?

If the plane was going as fast at the official story says it was the doppler effect would prevent them from hearing it first. Even if they saw it in the rearview mirror it would be for a fraction of a second coming at them head on which is not a very detailed view of any plane.

USA Today: Most witnesses I've seen metion being in the HOV lane. Car pool, van pool. Is it ruled out that these guys were all in th same USA Today van? That's what I always guessed, but I don't know for sure...

I went to the new USA Today/Gannett building and interviewed Joel Sucherman and Peter Kopf and both were in cars.

Joel is an editor and Peter is a director of IT and their interviews will be featured in the Researcher's Edition.

Almost all of the USA Today employee witnesses were Reporters or editors or held some other high level position.

It's uncanny.

Well I hope the Researcher's Edition will answer alot more questions and maybe them being on camera will they remember something that they did not put into their accounts from earlier years.