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.
From the Law to the Lord
(featuring Stephen McGraw)
Google Video Link |
Middleton and his co-workers at Arlington continued to work Sept. 11 as Washington offices closed and buildings emptied. The cemetery crew had no choice. Funerals were scheduled and burials had to be completed, chaos and all.
source
" Invaluable too was "the spiritual and human formation that I have received over the years from priests of Opus Dei."
source
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
This is an honest question: what assertions are you making and how does your very interesting read support those assertions?
I'm not trying to be schmarmy......I really don't know what your trying to prove in your thread.
Originally posted by Caustic Logic
And regarding his position, Craig said at the other thread that the only clue to position was he was under the plane, so maybe under the north path. Really? He didn't show you on a map? What about being close to Lloyd's cab? Why is e placed under the official path in your graphic if you're sure that's not where the plane was? That's confusing to me...
Thanks, Megaman, for trying to get it shut down again. I don't know if there's anything else I want to say anyway. Now that I've rushed this in before closure again, lemme go back and read for what's new.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
He would have a front row seat to the plane hitting the poles. The notion that he could miss 5 light poles falling down all around him 10's of feet away strains credulity if the poles were in fact really hit by the plane.
What happened to the poor family that was waiting for him as he hung around the Pentagon?
In a nutshell CL claims that CIT has been deceptive about McGraw's account in the sense that we are supposedly trying to cover up the notion that he is a "south side witness" meaning he saw the plane fly south of the CITGO gas station contradicting the north of the CITGO testimony.
This notion is instantly debunked by the fact that McGraw specifically claims he did not see the plane on the approach at all but CL insisted that there are "indicators" that point to a south side approach in his testimony.
Unfortunately for CL none of his points hold water. Here they are:
1. That McGraw claims the plane came from "behind" him which would indicate a south side approach.
McGraw made no such statement. Ever. I guess CL simply decided to make that up as he has offered no retraction.
2. That McGraw gestures that the plane came from behind him.
He did no such thing but he DID gesture that the plane traveled left to right supporting a north side approach.
(as presented) it's clear that McGraw actually supports a north side approach before a south side approach due to his hand gesture indicating a left to right flight path and the fact that he did not see any light poles getting clipped.
So if we are to go off of CL's "clues"
Although McGraw claims he witnessed the impact; due to the north side testimony it is clear to us that if he isn't a traitor/spy like fellow Opus Dei sympathizer Robert Hanssen that he was deceived in this 1 second military sleight of hand illusion just like the CITGO witnesses were.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Thanks, Megaman, for trying to get it shut down again. I don't know if there's anything else I want to say anyway. Now that I've rushed this in before closure again, lemme go back and read for what's new.
Thanks for trying to get it shut down???
Why would you want to stifle discussion of the evidence?
Didn't you just say you wanted to restart the thread yourself?
Originally posted by megaman1234
I have a couple quick questions. How accurate is that green dot pinpointing McGraws car on the map? Is that the verified location by him?
Also - I don't understand your sticking point of him not seeing the poles get hit. The plane was traveling at over 500 mph. At that speed the poles would have been down a mere instant after he registered the plane. In the roar of the plane, I would think that the tink of light poles getting clipped would be insignificant in comparison. Plus those poles in front of him would have been knocked forward, onto the side of the road, where they may not be readily visible from the left hand lane.
You also make the point of Faram saying it was 10 minutes later. I don’t think you can offer that up as rebuttal until you interview him in a likewise fashion. Perhaps both of them are off by a few minutes, who knows? But it really doesn't change anything.
"He literally had the stole in one hand and a prayer book in the other and in one fluid motion crossed the guardrail," said Mark Faram, a reporter from the Navy Times who witnessed McGraw in the first moments after the crash.
source
“When the explosion happened I ran down the hill to the site and arrived there approximately 10 minutes after the explosion."
source
Also to be honest - i don't see how you can discern a flight path from his description either way. he saw nothing behind him, felt it overhead, and saw it hit the building. Its too vague to label him as north OR south. But he certainly counts as an impact witness - which is the bottom line to all this.
In all - he strikes me as a very honest witness. He is clear to differentiate between what he KNOWS he saw, and what he "thinks", or may have heard after the fact.
Once again - I think it is shameful that you are slandering him like this, in order to further your agenda. I will continue to ask for a moderator to review the last part of your post, and take appropriate action.
Originally posted by coughymachine
Craig,
I thought you accepted that McGraw was indirectly a south side witness, whilst I accepted that his testimony alone didn't refute the north side evidence.
Have you had a change of heart?