*new presentation* Over The Navy Annex featuring Terry Morin

Who really cares either way. It's a goofy argument.

Flight 77 although much smaller than the Pentagon, killed hundreds of people and caused extensive damage.

I think it is safe to assume that it would only take 10 or so 757's to all but destroy the Pentagon...or at least make in completely inhabitable.

reply to post by 654321

---

Let me rephrase this AGAIN for you since you are clearly having trouble with this and keep calling me a "liar" over it.

A 757 is a mere fraction of 1% the size of the Pentagon.

Do you understand this fact?

reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT

---

Yeah, I am sure they get it. You can all let it go now. GEEESH

*** ATTENTION ***

Get back on topic.

One more off topic / uncivil post and Posting Bans will be handed out.

At last!
I was getting really winded up lately by this childish playground around here.

Grow up first, try to reach a mature position in life.
Please children, do us all a favor and go back to the JREF forums where this kind of silliness and distracting threads has evolved into an art form.

We would really like to discuss the opening post and its implications, eventually backed up by finding more, reliable other-person-positions, so we can construct a very narrow 911 plane flight path which does reflect the view of many real humans who saw it all with their own eyes.

We know by now that you can't trust a journalist who has to bow for his editor who has to bow for the owner and he has to carefully weight the feelings of the shareholders.

And those feelings are drastically changing these days, so Revelation time is just over the horizon.

Greed is out, and common sense is back in.


We can as I did, construct quite a precise flight path now, based on all witnesses which have been provided by CIT and the early interviews.
I think it resembles my drawn blue line quite well.
Any takers?

TwoTrees-Pentagon-shadows.
Full scale: www.alsx.info...



The shadows are very wrong.
They are also in this next picture.

Daddy-Arlington-shadows.
Full scale: www.alsx.info...



Therefore, what is the reason for Google to do that in a 2009 picture, still depicting a Pentagon west wall under heavy re-construction?
Thus, years ago taken by satellite?

It clearly was a cloudless day, and the whole area was in full sunlight from the right, sun in the east. So why cut off certain areas precisely and change them for a western sunlit part? The Pentagon area is full with these anomalies.
Are they hiding the missile defense launch pads?
This would be in hidden underground or concrete structures, under roofs or any other camouflage.
Search for appropriate places, and find them.

Have all these brave men and women lived and died under a constant lie?
Are you still living according to a lie?
How can you accept such a lie?

Have all these beautiful brave men and woman died in vain in New York and Washington, trying to save other men and woman?

It could happen again, however now you could be one of those in needs for saving.

I will have a closer look at the eyewitnesses from the “”someguyyoudontknow33”” list, and omit the ones who do not link anymore to a still working link.
www.geocities.com...

Especially the ones linked to a subdirectory none works anymore, which is in fact a tad bit strange, since the main directory still exists. Thus, it could be possible that some kind of restructuring of the internal directories did cause this strange effect. Perhaps they are named differently now, and are still there to be found by investigating minds.
This is the first one I will discuss now:

www.boston.com...



That last bolded by me part is an interesting addition to the facts we now know about the aftermath of the Pentagon attack, I did not know that I-395 had almost no passenger cars on it some time after the plane hit.
The biggest problem however, I have with all these journalists reporting on 9/11 about the Pentagon event, is that most of them used the term I-395 when in fact they wanted to indicate route 27, also known as Washington Boulevard, the road passing the West wall of the Pentagon, where the plane supposedly hit that wall.



This eyewitness report is again quite uncertain about the exact spot where she stopped after “”the plane disappeared””. Thus, also about the trajectory she took on her way to work. When we assume now that she was on Route 27, going north and in the process of passing the Pentagon, then that fits the other witnesses we saw before. Her assumption that the plane went toward Reagan National Airport does fit a northern approach, a north of Citgo approach. Because if she was on the eastbound going real I-395, in the direction of the bridges, she would have talked about a river approach and she would have never lost sight of the descending plane. Thus, she probably was in front of the three trees inside the cloverleaf, which blocked the view of an impact for most drivers on 27 (“”the plane disappeared””).

==============

www.jmu.edu...



This was Steve Anderson ('85), Director of Communications, USA TODAY.
His communication skills are poor, or he tried to obscure some very important facts, if his witness account is true. When he saw the second tragedy, the hit of the South Tower at 09:02, his use of the words “shortly after” is a tad bit strange for a journalist. But let’s ignore that and proceed to him hearing jet engines pass.
He then said that “a few moments later, -…- the plane caught my eye”, etcetera.

He leaves out completely the officially pushed huge circling around above the area. And according to the official story line, that plane was MUCH higher when it passed his building.

Remember, he was looking from his glass panel covered USA Today office tower in Rosslyn southwards towards the Pentagon, quite far away. The problem I have with his account is the impression he tries to implant that he heard the plane and then a few moments later he saw the plane, and then he proceeds to tell us how it slammed into the west wall of the Pentagon.

He just ignores the MANY minutes that plane should have needed to make that huge circle around from the moment it passed his building. Coming in from the north on a River Approach path to Reagan National Airport, then banking away to the right after passing his building in Rosslyn, and starting to make that big circle around. To finally return somewhere above Columbia Pike and crossing the roof tops of the Navy Annex, passing North of the Citgo gas station and flying to the Pentagon.

This man should be interrogated thoroughly in a future reprocessing of the 911 facts.



Interesting, the Safety Manager for AMEC Construction Management, which is a British based company, which withdrew all their US offices after reconstruction ended, back to Britain.
It has always amazed me, that a Brit firm renovated such a high profile defense institute like the Pentagon. Meaning all Pentagon renovation blueprints were accessible and copy able by non-US citizens.
This man could perhaps tell us more about the diesel powered generator trailer damage. And more...
==============

Btw, Craig Ranke, I interpreted the '73 date wrong on the Christine Peterson alumni page, it means in the US, the Class Year they got their degree and not their birth year. thus, she worked 28 years after graduation in Washington up till 9/11.
So we have to add about 24 years to her age on 9/11, which will be around 52 years then.

Yeah that's what I ended up figuring as well.

So that image you posted is likely not her either as it doesn't seem like it was taken in '73.


[edit on 2-2-2009 by Craig Ranke CIT]

I did not post that image, SPreston did in this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

He added those two pictures, one supposedly from Christine Peterson and one from Penny Elgas, to my quoted post which had those pictures not in it.

I searched myself on that Northern Arizona University site, but found no picture anymore. Instead I found this :
www.naualumni.com...
But the name of the mother does not fit, or she must use a nickname.
That girl died in Iraq.
This is another Peterson,
www.naualumni.com...
He perhaps is the brother of the killed girl with the same name.

I'm looking deeper in it, she seems to be a psychologist.

Yeah, sorry about that LaBTop. Those were the photos which I tracked. The Penny Elgas seems to be right; but apparently that is a different Christine Peterson, although it seemed to be correct.

Another NoC eyewitness, reported in such a manner that a casual reader in 2001 would place him in a very different spot then.

web.archive.org...://cincypost.com/attack/cissel091201.html



www.mytravelguide.com...
Click the Map option to the left. It expires, so I uploaded it:




Freedom Park is a former outdoor museum in Arlington, Virginia, located at 1101 Wilson Blvd, site of the old Newseum building in Rosslyn.
Most of the exhibits and the Journalists' Memorial were removed in 2008. Only the Spectrum of Freedom remains. The park remains open to the public.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...(Arlington,_Virginia)


Cissell was on Washington Boulevard, right in front of the heli pad which lays in front of the Pentagon west wall. He must be on one of the earliest photos.
Interstate 110 can be seen on my map, and is the extension of Washington Boulevard. Tell me why not calling it the way it is, for a honest journalist, but instead reporting him on 110?
There has been a lot of editing or misrepresenting during and after 9/11!

Especially this remark of him should be scrutinized: “”Then the plane, which was taking out telephone and power lines on its way in, hit the building. “”

He reports the plane over the road he was on, Washington Boulevard, as flying so low one could have touched its bottom by standing on a car.

He was on that road for sure:
“”He remembers the helipad the plane flew over before smacking into the Pentagon was close enough to him that ''I could have thrown a baseball at it and hit it.'' “”
Pay especially attention to him reporting that the plane flew over the helipad.

reply to post by LaBTop

---

That's an interesting account for a number of reasons like the altitude of the plane above the roadway, observation of actual passengers at the windows of the plane, the actual impact at the building and the plane striking poles on the way in. It's hard to imagine such a detailed observation in what would have been a very short period of time but, having been in life threatening situations myself, things do seem to go in extreme slow motion as the adrenaline kicks in.

There were no overhead mains in that area so his statement about power/telephone lines is possibly an (incorrect) assumption related to poles being hit (they were connected to underground mains though).

Pilgrum, he definitely did not see POLES being hit, he said he saw the plane take out telephone and power LINES on its way in.
Find those lines in the online posted satellite pictures from 9/11 and shortly before, and you know exactly where the plane flew along the cemetery and over the lawn.


By the way, Al Neuharth, a South Dakota native and 1950 graduate of the University of South Dakota founded both USA TODAY and the Freedom Forum.
And there were a disproportional amount of USA TODAY affiliates on Washington Boulevard when the plane crossed it.
Did they all had a strange habit of turning up very late at work? If they were all passing the Pentagon at 09:37:45, they normally would have needed another half hour to reach their building in Rosslyn, park the car, take the elevator and reach their offices.

Another strange habit for too many eyewitnesses on Washington Boulevard, according to Christine Peterson.
There were a disproportional amount of people with cameras present after the event. And showing them at hand, taking pictures or filming.
So why are there so little pictures and videos of the first minutes publicized?


The next definitive NoC, North of Citgo, and ONA, over Navy Annex fly over, witness:

Note that Archive.org links load very slow, even at fast connections!
Copy this line, and then delete the two pairs of ( ) around the http:// parts, in your browser address line, if you don't know how to construct a broken ATS link, caused by underscores or commas or double dots etc, in the linked addresses (just copy and paste the non-linked part behind the working part in your browser's address line):

(http://)web.archive.org/web/20011123074544/(http://)www.thedailycamera.com/news/terror/sept01/11aclr1.html

! ALWAYS ! broken Archive.org ATS-Link, a nasty software bug:
web.archive.org...://www.thedailycamera.com/news/terror/sept01/11aclr1.html




Yep, right over the Navy Annex at a slow angle. Exactly like all others described it.
And again the much slower approach recollection, same as all others.
And he did not feel it hit, remember that when you read the next one.


Next, this one instantly caught my eye:



He clearly describes a passing-over plane from experience, many planes per day did pass over the Pentagon on a southern approach to the northern runway on Reagan International Airport. But a lot higher then this one.
This one ""was way too low"".
And after he reports a passing over plane, he reports a ""sonic boom"".

His recollection sounds eerily like a fly over to me, followed by a subsequent detonation.

Pilgrum, I will give you a helping hand on the telephone lines:
archive.southcoasttoday.com...

reply to post by LaBTop

---

I wasn't aware of any overhead mains or telephone lines in the area which doesn't mean they weren't there but that's not the issue as Mr Middleton *could* have been making a relative statement because those sorts of lines (low voltage, street lighting, telephone) are generally around the 5-6 metre height above the ground. The previous witness seemed to be making a more definite statement about poles/wires being hit by the plane.

The Navy Annex is about 21m tall so, if we consider the plane cleared the top of that structure, could it have descended to the height of poles within the ANC grounds (if there actually were any in that area) and still have pulled up to clear the CITGO and the Pentagon which is 23m above ground level?

We all know where the only poles definitely known to be damaged are and it's not in the area of the NOC flight path. Have we any evidence at all about any other poles (and/or wires) being damaged by the plane?

The main reason I doubt the existence of any overhead wires in the area is that it would pose a possible hazard with the helipads being very nearby, lightpoles being more clearly visible to pilots.



[edit on 6/2/2009 by Pilgrum]

I will propose more witnesses for a NoC flight path, through lots of Archive.org links to newspaper articles, in smaller news outlets, where you can find the more precise details, but also the exaggerations:

===================
Area woman watched as Pentagon exploded :
web.archive.org...
Woman at 14th floor of the Sheraton National Hotel in Arlington, Va.saw the plane pass by so near that she thought she could touch it.

Her report acknowledges my drawing on an overhead Google map on one of the earlier pages of this thread, where I proposed a flight path very near passing the Sheraton Hotel south wall. Have a look again.

Which strengthens the Morin reporting of a plane flying right over the 4th and 5th wing of the Navy Annex, and fully dismantles the officially pushed SoC flight path passing the Navy Annex to the right, over or to the right of Columbia Pike, according to a backwards plotted path, backwards from the downed light poles, which were the strongest case to explain for the damage path inside the Pentagon.
===================

www.unansweredquestions.org...



If it wasn't so serious, you should explain this kind of journalism as hilarious.
The pilot arrived at about 09:12 a.m., if we may believe that journalist, and the first planes got in the air at 05:30 p.m. which is 8 hours and 18 minutes later. I wouldn't describe that as ""within moments"" if I were that journalist.

The interesting part is that fifteen F-16s were initially ordered to protect Air Force One.
It seems that there was quite some confusion who would be trusted to protect George Bush in the air. First leaving Florida in the morning without any protective fighter shield ( ! ), then leaving his meeting with Warren Buffet and the rest of the military-industrial complex board members, again without a protective shield, it seems that Georgie's existing vulnerabilities had to be shown to him to keep him in line; or he was so confused who he could not trust anymore that he kept changing his mind, who to call for protection:

killtown.911review.org...



What a heap of strange coincidences that day, ain't it so?

www.hoovers.com...
www.hoovers.com...



You will find some very well known NWO family names mentioned every day around these forums, in their books.

Mrs Anne Tatlock has made quite some advances in her career lately,
(Note that Director most of the time means you're a Board member) :

Anne M. Tatlock Director Merck & Co., Inc.
(Huge firm, 60,000 employees,
makes therapeutic drugs and chemicals worldwide)

Anne M. Tatlock Director Fortune Brands, Inc.
(Huge firm, 31,000 employees, Distiller, Golf Equipment,
Home products and hardware)

Anne M. Tatlock Director Franklin Resources, Inc.
(Big firm, 8,700 employees.
Descendants of founder Rupert Johnson Sr. and their families own
more than a third of Franklin Resources.)

Anne M. Tatlock Chairman The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
(Andrew W. Mellon was a banking titan,
this is one of the leading charitable foundations in the US)

web.archive.org...



The couple must have been in the vicinity of the two trees, if the plane first came over the top of them and then brushed the trees. The only other trees on the Pentagon side of Washington Boulevard are the three trees inside one of the cloverleaf roads, much further south. And when you have heard and seen all the testimonies from the North of Citgo flight path witnesses, you know by now that the plane could not have brushed those southernly placed trees. I offered a few extra witnesses on top of the 13 from CIT, and these new ones were in the vicinity of the two trees in front of the heli-pad and saw the plane pass over those two trees.

I am still contemplating why, if the Pentagon attack was a planned one (which it looks like by now, according to the mounting CIT evidence, combined with the new witnesses), the Navy Telecommunications Center had to be silenced at that precise moment.

Perhaps some entity had the means to infiltrate the computer networks through compromised sets of hardware chips from China, as has been talked about here often, and was able to send launch orders to a Naval vessel which launched an already pre-programmed chips set, pack of latest brand of supersonic fast missiles, which hit in turn the Pentagon offices of the Navy itself from a southern approach.

That would have send quite the kind of impressive message to some self-proclaimed rulers of the world, ain't it?
That would have been some damn smart kids to meticulously plan such a heinous pack of events, if you look at it from a pure intellectual level.

The missile impacts damage must have look-aliked as a plane impact, but if planned, those post impact Pentagon damage photos could have been fully photo shopped too, that would be a tad bit cheaper and easier to do. Then only the adjacent damage must have fitted into the photo shopped part of the west wall which collapsed half an hour later.

I still find it quite suspicious that those two early-arrived fire engines were always diagonally spraying ALL over the impact part of the west wall in ALL existing/publicized photos. Thus covering up most of the impact damage wizh foam and shortly after with water sprays.

We had to cut and paste from many photos to construct a full panorama of the whole damage BEFORE collapse.

And why did one of the fire engines not go nearer to the heaviest burning spot, the generator trailer, which had its own diesel supply, which was burning and smoking so well, that it counted for nearly all of the smoke rising in the first hour.

And there are overhead photos posted by me and others here of a fire-free Pentagon west wall and a nearly pristine Pentagon lawn and a NOT burning diesel generator, during the first evacuation period of ALL persons from the lawn, when that false fifth plane alarm came radioed through.

That photo has started my first personal alarms regarding the Pentagon events.

This is another photo of the eerily absent fires and smoke, found in the FOIA freed online collection of John Farmer :



When examining the properties of this photo, it gives a whole list of them, and what interests us is of course the time it is taken on 9/11, which is 11:18 a.m.
It also lists the distance when taken as 65.5 meters away.

Edit: John Farmer named that FOIA photo 100-0010_IMG


[edit on 8/2/09 by LaBTop]

reply to post by Pilgrum

---

Pilgrum, this is the second time you mis-quoted my witness, James R. Cissell, as if he was telling about "poles" being hit. He did NOT use that word. He used the word LINES.
And I will give you a picture of those lines.
Please do not slip in and insert too insinuating words in a witness testimony.

The jury, being the whole human race, will not be pleased, especially now that proof of a huge 9/11 deception is mounting with every day passing.
And exactly one of the main deceptions were those 5 planted "downed" light poles on the non-existing South of Citgo flight path.
That whole SoC path was one huge planned deception, aided by heaps of bought and paid journalists and their CEO's, bought and blinded by patriotism from the first moments on.
A disgrace for real investigative journalism.
Which still exists by the way and I am thankful for it.

LINES, they were not at the Arlington Cemetery grounds as you implied, they were clearly outside those grounds, and mr. Middleton is precisely describing the height of the plane he saw very near to him flying just above those power lines.
Middleton said ""the plane was no higher than the tops of telephone poles as it lurched toward the Pentagon"".
And if you watch CIT's filmed report of Mr. Middleton on the spot where he was working with his three wheeled sweeper in the Cemetery grounds, you know now that he exactly described the telephone poles as he saw them from that spot he was working on 9/11 when that plane passed him.

The other witness I provided above, later on; James R. Cissell, even tells us he saw that plane taking out some of these lines:
“”Then the plane, which was taking out telephone and power lines on its way in, hit the building. “”
He is not describing lines on the Pentagon premises, but along the road passing the south boundary of Arlington Cemetery. Which is just two hundred meters max away from the Citgo station.

This is the full size picture link from the John Farmer FOIA pictures,
he named this one 100-0007_IMG and it was shot at 09:46 AM, that's just 8 minutes after the plane passed the Citgo gas station :

www.alsx.info...

And this is a forum fitted picture, where you can't really clearly see the telephone lines going along the Arlington Cemetery south boundary road, and then crossing over and extending to the Citgo gas station, where they provided the connection for its land lines:



And thus this is a partly zoomed-in part of the full scale picture, where you can clearly see those telephone and power lines situated by the way in the lowest part of the trajectory the plane flew, as I lined out in a former post with a dark blue curved line on a Google Earth overhead photo:

Full Link: www.alsx.info...


And this is a deep zoomed and contrasted one of the lines :




And didn't we have a story from a cashier in the Citgo station who was on the phone when the plane passed (you see him talking in that phone behind the half moon shaped counter in the FBI seized but later FOIA freed Citgo video), who had to borrow a hand phone to complete his conversation?

The camera owner from the John Farmer FOIA photo set obviously had his camera time set on a different time zone.

The first picture I found of the same camera type, the Canon PowerShot S110, has a time stamp of 08:43 AM, but shows an areal view from a heli above, where the Pentagon roof already caved in.
So a rough guess would be that he had his camera time set 2 hrs earlier.
The FBI should be the ones to know the exact discrepancy from DC real time on 9/11, since those photos were FOIA'ed from them.

Thus the times from the photos mentioned in my above two posts must be shifted about 2 hrs later.
That means that the no-smoke photo has been shot around 13:18 PM instead of 11:18 AM.

And the Citgo power lines photo was shot around 11:46 AM.

This is that first 08:43 AM photo, which is interesting for its areal view of the Two Trees in front of the heli-pad and the presence of three other fire fighter engines, but they are waiting at the corner of the south Parking lot.
Why were only those two engines allowed on the lawn, spraying the collapse hole?

You also see three of the five "downed" light poles laying in the grass.
The other was sticking in LLoyd England's its taxi windscreen, and the last one is visible in J.Farmer photo ""Fairfax1"" in the sub directory /neit749_photos.php. Its a photo of a darkblue/silver Police helicopter from Fairfax County (nr N408??) and in the background the fifth pole is laying on the grass behind some skinny trees beside the underpass bridge on Route 27 (Washington Boulevard).
You know by now, that they were all faked as "downed" by the plane.

Full link: www.alsx.info...

Forum fitted link: