Actual C-130 Interaction With The Pentaplane helps reveal the TRUE flight path., page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 4 times

reply posted on 12-12-2007 @ 12:18 AM by Craig Ranke CIT

reply to post by Boone 870

Nothing.

It has to be either left or right.

Nothing changes either way.

reply posted on 12-12-2007 @ 10:41 PM by Boone 870

I noticed in the OP that you had a ? next to O'Brien's name.

O'Brien?: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.

ATC: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?

O'Brien?: Yup

ATC: He's moving away?

That's not O'Brien.

That transcript was cut a little short.

It's Colin Scoggins(Boston Center) relaying information to Senior Airman Stacia Rountree at NEADS(Huntress).

Vanityfair.com audiotape of the conversation.

The audiotape clearly shows that Scoggins corrected himself. He says, "6 Southwest-6 southwest of the White House.... deviating away."

There never was an aircraft 6 miles to the southeast of the White House.

That works out with the RADES data.

reply posted on 12-12-2007 @ 11:11 PM by Craig Ranke CIT

reply to post by Boone 870

Yeah I know thanks.

It has been corrected in my posts at other forums but you can't edit here after the first day.

ETA:

Interesting.

I downloaded it before and the correction wasn't there.

[edit on 12-12-2007 by Craig Ranke CIT]

reply posted on 12-12-2007 @ 11:26 PM by Craig Ranke CIT

Ok well 6 miles SW of the white house would put it about 3 miles from the Pentagon.

At 535 mph that means the plane would have hit the white house in about 7 seconds.

Scoggins reported that at 9:35:41

So that's a contradiction.

reply posted on 12-12-2007 @ 11:50 PM by infinityoreilly

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

Nice research once again, your certainly calling some of the official story into question. I'll continue to read your posts and those who try to contradict you.

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 01:40 PM by Boone 870

originally posted by Craig Ranke
Ok well 6 miles SW of the white house would put it about 3 miles from the Pentagon.

At 535 mph that means the plane would have hit the white house in about 7 seconds.

Scoggins reported that at 9:35:41

So that's a contradiction.

Not necessarily.

You're assuming that Scoggins is watching the radar screen as he's talking to NEADS. It's pretty clear from the audiotapes that Scoggins is relaying information from someone else at Boston Center.

He called to report an aircraft 6 miles southwest of the White House. The call started at 9:35:41, he was told where the aircraft was and then called NEADS.

Off to Google Earth I go.

At 9:35:41 Flight 77 is 11 miles from the White House(long line).
From the White House, I went to a point 6 miles southwest and drew a line.
Flight 77 with 6 miles southwest of the White House at 9:34:13.

He said that the aircraft was deviating away from the White House. It's pretty obvious that he was reporting the aircraft as it started the right hand turn toward the south and not as it was ending its turn before lining up with the Pentagon.

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 01:47 PM by Craig Ranke CIT

But the same description also fits the loop we provide as the decoy flight would also have been "deviating away" from the white house and ended up about 6 miles SW.

However our loop also fits with what ABC news, Monte Belger, Steve O'Brien, and our charter boat captain who all fatally contradict the 84 RADES data and the NTSB data.

So although the Colin Scoggin's report could go either way all of this other data can not.

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 06:35 PM by Boone 870

Craig, you mentioned Kieth Wheelhouse and Joel Sucherman in the OP. Where do they tie into this story?

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 07:59 PM by Craig Ranke CIT

reply to post by Boone 870

Ooooo!

Good question.

They both claim there was a "2nd plane" in the area at the same time as the alleged impact.

Wheelhouse specifically says it was a C-130 and that it was literally "shadowing" the plane that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon and that it veered away at the very last second.

Sucherman claims he saw a "2nd plane" but says he can't identify what kind or color but he says that it veered off north upriver within "3 to 5 seconds" of the alleged impact.

If these claims were true they would of course prove the RADES data fraudulent but the evidence simply does not support their claims which has other implications.

We have exclusive video taped interviews with both of these alleged witnesses and they will both be featured in our next release.

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 08:17 PM by Boone 870

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

So that would make it five airplanes in the area?

1. Silver American Airlines
2. An airplane shadowing within a few seconds
3. C-130
4. The white plane
5. E-4B

reply posted on 13-12-2007 @ 08:36 PM by Craig Ranke CIT

reply to post by Boone 870

Make what you will of the evidence and how many planes there really were but no matter how you slice it; it doesn't look too good for the RADES or NTSB data.

Oh and we have another "gem" from the jems report but I'll let you wait for that or figure it out for yourself.

reply posted on 6-4-2009 @ 07:58 AM by SPreston

reply to post by Boone 870

posted by Boone 870
reply to post by SPreston

Here is a link to the sector recording with the controller that instructed GOFER06 to follow Flight 77.

Well Boone, it seems Craig has adequately replied to your disinformation. Were you part of the fitting the evidence to the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY from the very beginning?

This and the RADES data were faked and other evidence altered to fit.

Gee Boone; you've been repeatedly corrected, and obviously learned nothing from your errors, and you just keep on repeating the endless disinformation? Ad infinitum?

[edit on 4/6/09 by SPreston]