*new presentation* Over The Navy Annex featuring Terry Morin, page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times


reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 01:00 PM by jthomas
Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
JThomas,,,

I've followed this thread (and many others you've been in) and its beyond logic or reason how utterly in denial you seem to be even when a government official is one of the EYE WITNESSES who unequivocally states something that irrefutably supports CRAIG and the NOC path, and clearly is an UNBIASED OBJECTIVE CREDIBLE WITNESS.


You think so? How come?

Yet you still refuse to accept what he's said... Do you have a mental disability or are you just upset you're realizing the evidence has proven you've been deceived and are defending the LIE 9/11 was?


Fortunately, we real skeptics are not taken in by the likes of CIT. Not many people are. But what CIT and we know are that the only reason CIT keeps going on and on is because there are a bevy of gullible people who will believe anything CIT tells them, e. g., you.

So let's review what Terry Morin actually said so you can understand reality:

I had just reached the elevator in the 5th Wing of BMDO/Federal Office Building (FOB) #2 – call it approximately 9:36 AM. I was already trying to make some sense out of the World Trade Tower attacks having heard about them on the radio. The news was sketchy, but the fact that it was a terrorist attack was already known. I then realized that I was wearing sunglasses and needed to go back to Lot 3 to retrieve my clear lenses. Since it was by no means a short walk to my car, I was upset with myself for being so distracted. Approximately 10 steps out from between Wings 4 and 5, I was making a gentle right turn towards the security check-in building just above Wing 4 when I became aware of something unusual. I can’t remember exactly what I was thinking about at that moment, but I started to hear an increasingly loud rumbling behind me and to my left. As I turned to my left, I immediately realized the noise was bouncing off the 4-story structure that was Wing 5. One to two seconds later the airliner came into my field of view. By that time the noise was absolutely deafening. I instantly had a very bad feeling about this but things were happening very quickly. The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB (flight path parallel the outer edge of the FOB). Everything was shaking and vibrating, including the ground. I estimate that the aircraft was no more than 100 feet above me (30 to 50 feet above the FOB) in a slight nose down attitude. The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn’t be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities. Within seconds the plane cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO and was heading directly towards the Pentagon. Engines were at a steady high-pitched whine, indicating to me that the throttles were steady and full. I estimated the aircraft speed at between 350 and 400 knots. The flight path appeared to be deliberate, smooth, and controlled. As the aircraft approached the Pentagon, I saw a minor flash (later found out that the aircraft had sheared off a portion of a highway light pole down on Hwy 110). As the aircraft flew ever lower I started to lose sight of the actual airframe as a row of trees to the Northeast of the FOB blocked my view. I could now only see the tail of the aircraft. I believe I saw the tail dip slightly to the right indicating a minor turn in that direction. The tail was barely visible when I saw the flash and subsequent fireball rise approximately 200 feet above the Pentagon. There was a large explosion noise and the low frequency sound echo that comes with this type of sound. Associated with that was the increase in air pressure, momentarily, like a small gust of wind. For those formerly in the military, it sounded like a 2000lb bomb going off roughly ½ mile in front of you. At once there was a huge cloud of black smoke that rose several hundred feet up. Elapsed time from hearing the initial noise to when I saw the impact flash was between 12 and 15 seconds.

www.geocities.com...


One day, I'm sure you'll thank me for helping you out. Have a swell day.



reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 01:47 PM by CameronFox
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT




The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn’t be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities.


So, we are to forget what he stated back in 2001 and now go by what he is recalling 6 years after the fact?

Great Job Craig... I'll buy that.


reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 01:58 PM by Craig Ranke CIT
reply to post by CameronFox



CameronFox is helping his best buddy jthomas demonstrate why first-hand confirmation of eyewitness accounts is so important while failing to bother reading the posts preceding his last one.


Yes CameronFox. Notice how even in his first article he doesn't say that he "saw" the stripes and merely relays what we already know he believes from what he was told.

But he clarified the details regarding exactly what he saw in person if you would simply listen to what he says:


If I would have seen a side view I could have told the people it was an American Airlines. Because I would have seen the stripes. I didn't see the stripes I saw the silver belly.


No matter how much you plug your ears and refuse to listen to him he confirmed direct, in-person, first-hand that he COULD NOT tell it was supposed to be an AA jet.

One thing for sure his placement of the plane ONA is fatal to the official story no matter how you slice it.



reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 02:20 PM by CameronFox
reply to post by Craig Ranke CIT



Where in his statement in 2001 did he say that he assumed or somebody TOLD him it was an AA jet? Where in the statement does he state that someone TOLD him that there were red and blue stripe.

READ the statement again.

Then... read it again.

Then pay attention to this part:


As the aircraft flew ever lower I started to lose sight of the actual airframe


This means Craig, that he saw the airframe. You simply do not want to accept his statements as they were back in 2001 because you know for a fact they kill your fantasy.

The only assumption that I see that he made was the type of aircraft.

You Craig, have changed your unanimous NOC claim.

You have changed your flyover location.

You lied to Morin proving your integrity.

where did it get you? no where at all. USA Today, MSN, ABC, NBC, FOX... none of them are reporting a massive military deception on 911. You wneet against your word for the sake of humanity. The return....

NADA!

Part of being in the truth movement one would assume, is being truthful. You sir, were not.

You see what's going on and see how little fanfare you are getting from people that used to believe you.



It's over Johnny.



[edit on 9-1-2009 by CameronFox]


reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 05:59 PM by Craig Ranke CIT
Originally posted by CameronFox

Where in his statement in 2001 did he say that he assumed or somebody TOLD him it was an AA jet? Where in the statement does he state that someone TOLD him that there were red and blue stripe.


Since he specifically clarified that he could NOT tell it was AA because he could only see the belly this is a proven fact.




]
This means Craig, that he saw the airframe. You simply do not want to accept his statements as they were back in 2001 because you know for a fact they kill your fantasy.


Now you are straight lying because he NEVER says that he "saw" the airframe or stripes and he specifically clarified that he did NOT see the airframe or stripes. So while you are forced to put words in his mouth to support your fantasy Terry Morin already clarified this for you by specifically stating otherwise.

That is why first-hand confirmation of witness reports is so important although it's clear that you don't like this type of evidence and prefer unconfirmed and more generalized static claims that are easier to spin rather than specific answers to specific questions first-hand.

Now please stop lying about what he claimed that he saw.



You Craig, have changed your unanimous NOC claim.


What are you talking about? All 13 witnesses are still 100% unanimous in this regard.

Please stop lying.


You have changed your flyover location.


Changing an ESTIMATE in regards to a HYPOTHESIS by a few dozen feet is irrelevant to the evidence. You are splitting hairs and grasping at straws at the same time.



You lied to Morin proving your integrity.


EXCUSE ME??? I did NOT lie to Morin.

I was perfectly honest with him.

The fact that I refused his request to not report what he told me is not a lie nor is it illegal. Given the implications of what he saw it would have been unethical for me to honor his request in this regard.

It would have been worse than keeping knowledge of a specific murder silent.


where did it get you? no where at all. USA Today, MSN, ABC, NBC, FOX... none of them are reporting a massive military deception on 911. You wneet against your word for the sake of humanity. The return....

NADA!

Part of being in the truth movement one would assume, is being truthful. You sir, were not.


YOU are the one lying.

I was 100% truthful.

Your rhetoric is deceptive, tiresome and extremely hollow.

As the other posters here keep making perfectly clear you are not effective with your obsession at spinning the evidence we present.

All you do is serve to help keep the information on the front page.

Great work!



reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 07:14 PM by GenRadek
reply to post by CameronFox



As you can see, there is something a little lacking in the CIT camp. Which statement will hold more water? The one made right after 9/11 or the one made nearly six years later? He saw the stripes and he states he did right after it happened. Now 6 years later, he didn't? Hmmm.....

For you and jthomas I found a few pics of an AA 757 flying overhead as close to what the witness could have seen. What do you guys think?








Just a few examples of possible views.

This next one I think shows it best as to what he could have seen, maybe even lower:





Look closely, you can see the red stripe on both sides of the fuselage, and it is directly overhead. Even here you can see it.

And what other eyewitnesses could have seen closer to the Pentagon and I very much doubt they would mistake it for anything else:




[edit on 1/9/2009 by GenRadek]


reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 07:55 PM by SPreston
posted by adam_zapple

So between 1/5 and 1/2 of a second. So how long did it take him after hearing the jet above him to look up?.....because if it took him more than 1/2 of a second, there's no way he could have seen it if he was between the wings and it was directly above him.


So how did you manage to miss this paragraph from the same post? If you people would bother to read the interviews and watch the video interviews and explanations, you would not be so lost in total confusion.

posted by SPreston
However we do not know the type of aircraft used for the decoy aircraft nor its speed, except it was much slower according to real living videotaped eyewitnesses. So lets guess and divide everything in half. Do not forget that Morin HEARD the aircraft approaching from the sound waves bouncing off the interior walls of the building wings, and was looking up EXPECTING to see an aircraft. Don't let the disinformation excreted by jthomas lead you down the path of fools.


Terry Morin explained how he could hear the aircraft coming before it passed above him. Of course that is another reason to expect that the decoy aircraft was flying at a much slower speed than the official aircraft in the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY. And this paragraph below from the same post is quite pertinent, because if it were the official aircraft from the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY, then Morin only needed to turn around and look south to see it. Quite simple isn't it?



posted by SPreston
Also, if the aircraft were the official Flight 77 757 depicted in the 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY which jthomas so foolishly defends, then Terry Morin could simply have turned around, looked to the south, and viewed the aircraft from the side about 300-400 feet away and about 30-50 feet above the parking lot level. Terry Morin would never have been so fooled to describe that aircraft as above him would he?



reply posted on 9-1-2009 @ 08:13 PM by GenRadek
reply to post by SPreston



What type of "decoy aircraft" are you talking about?
Was it another painted 757 looking like an AA plane? Or was it a C-130? A private jet? You use the term decoy aircraft and you don't even say what it is or what it was suppose to do? Unless you are are referring to the C-130 which showed up on scene AFTER the impact. So what was this "decoy aircraft" suppose to be doing? Was they decoy aircraft hitting the Pentagon? Its really starting to get confusing, unless this is what you are counting on, confuse your opponent to the point of submission and claim victory.
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^



9-11 lecture at Basel University, Switzerland.
  Posted 13 days ago with 14 member flags
9/11 Actors re-visited
  Posted 6 days ago with 12 member flags
Wikipedia categorizes 9/11 truth as \'denialism\'
  Posted 17 days ago with 11 member flags
Building Collapses in Rio
  Posted 14 days ago with 6 member flags
new film "Human the film (2012)" covers all the bases and more!
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous hacks CIA
  Breaking Alternative News, Posted 15 hours ago, 109 replies
Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 11 hours ago, 94 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 9 hours ago, 62 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 13 hours ago, 50 replies