Were The Alleged Flt 77 Official South Path Eyewitnesses Real People?

.

Or were some of these alleged crash eyewitnesses fake people invented to present a lie to the American people?

Or were they misrepresented by the lying media as crash witnesses when they were not?

From the list of Pentagon Witness Accounts (here)

Penny Elgas - Standstill northbound on Hwy 27 - saw aircraft to the side of and above Citgo gas station - claims aircraft passed over cars 4-5 car lengths in front of her - claims aircraft debris piece fell through open sun roof onto car seat - doesn't look like aircraft aluminum does it? - nor is it burned or scorched - Another North of Citgo eyewitness?



Well where is Columbia Pike perpendicular to Hwy 27? That is the portion of Columbia Pike which she claims she saw the aircraft fly across. And the blue line above is to the side of and above the Citgo gas station isn't it; just like she claimed? She also claims the aircraft banked slightly to the left didn't she? Penny Elgas is most definitely not an official south flight path eyewitness is she?




Stephen McGraw - Left lane northbound Hwy 27 - Plane flew 20 feet above car roof - exact same spot on road as HunkaHunka ATS alleged witness

Christine Peterson - Gridlock northbound Hwy 27 in front of helipad
Rodney Washington - Standstill northbound Hwy 27 - Aircraft hit ground at helipad

13 - Corporate owned paid propagandists enlisted to control the American people

Steve Anderson - USA Today - Gannett Co. Inc.
Richard Benedetto - USA Today reporter - Gannett Co. Inc.
Lisa Burgess - Stars & Stripes reporter - owned by Library of Congress
Bob Dubill - USA Today - Gannett Co. Inc.
Fred Gaskins - USA Today - Gannett Co. Inc.
Christopher Munsey - Navy Times Reporter - Gannett Co. Inc.
Vin Narayanan - USA Today reporter - Gannett Co. Inc.
John O'Keefe - Influence American Lawyer Media publication lobbyist
Mary Ann Owens - Gannet News Service - gridlock northbound Hwy 27 - aircraft flew directly over car
Kate Snow - CNN congressional correspondent
Joel Sucherman - USA Today editor - Gannett Co. Inc. - Claimed he heard a sonic boom, Hwy 110 on west side of Pentagon, and Reagan National across river
Greta van Susteren - CNN legal analyst - parking lot at Reagan - not a crash witness
Mike Walter - USA Today reporter - Gannett Co. Inc. - Standstill northbound on Hwy 27 - Got caught lying
Dave Winslow - AP radio reporter - located 10th floor Pentagon City

Lt Colonel Stuart Artman - walking near Washington Mall to the west of the Pentagon and the Potomac - not a witness to a crash

9 - place aircraft Over Naval Annex or ANC to the north

Sean Boger - Aircraft flew directly Over Naval Annex straight at him
Albert Hemphill - Aircraft flew directly Over Naval Annex
William Lagasse - Aircraft flew Over Naval Annex
Lincoln Leibner - Thought aircraft was flyover Arlington National Cemetery
William Middleton Sr - Aircraft flew directly Over Naval Annex
Terry Morin - Aircraft flew directly Over Naval Annex
Steve Patterson - Aircraft flew over Arlington National Cemetery - small 8-12 passenger aircraft
Dewey Snavely - Aircraft over Arlington National Cemetery
Levi Stephens - Aircraft flew Over Naval Annex

6+ - not crash witnesses

D.S. Khavkin - View of Pentagon blocked by Sheraton Hotel - not a crash witness
Kat Gaines - on Hwy 110 southbound west of Pentagon - could not possibly see light poles nor crash
Scott P. Cook - across Potomac on 5th floor - not a crash witness
Ken Ford - across Potomac on 15th floor - not a crash witness
Lesley Kelly - office in DC- not a crash witness
Steve Snaman - across Potomac at Fort McNair- not a crash witness

4+ - political hacks

Gary Bauer - NeoCON - professional liar and NWO political insider
Bobby Eberle - GOPUSA - professional liar and NWO political insider
Steven Gerard - Justice Department - political insider
Fred Hey - Congressional staff attorney - political insider

13 - untraceable and not witnesses at all

"Barbara"
"Dave"
"Div Devlin"
"Gus"
"K.M."
"M.J."
"Rick M."
"skarlet"
"Steve"
"Whisper2i"
Unidentified man - 20 passenger corporate jet
Unidentified man
Unnamed Navy admiral



3 at Reagan Metro platform where view was blocked by high buildings in Crystal City

Susan Carroll - Metro subway platform at Reagan National
Allen Cleveland - on Metro train pulling into Reagan National platform southbound
Meseidy Rodriguez - on Metro train pulling into Reagan National platform



Out of 127 alleged witnesses on this list, there are 13 of which are untraceable without names, and 9+ which place the actual aircraft Over the Naval Annex or Over ANC or North of the Citgo, and 13+ are media propagandists, and 4+ are political insiders, and about half of the remainder did not really see a crash, and a bunch were too far away to see anything at all or at Reagan National with the tall buildings of Crystal City blocking the view of the alleged crash site.

Pentagon Crash Witness Accounts

SPreston,

We're still waiting for your list of verified eyewitnesses to a jet flying low and fast over and away from the Pentagon.

I know it's exceedingly hard for you but you have had over seven years to provide that list.


Let's remind the CIT groupies how CIT was completely refuted:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

We just await your concession, SPreston.

Completely off topic to this thread, jthomas.

You've already admitted that you don't know how many people should have seen a possible flyover.

Why do you try to derail any flight path thread and turn it into a Pentagon flyover argument?

Alleged crash witness Phillip Thompson was driving eastbound in the I-395 HOV lanes even with the Naval Annex, and the aircraft he saw a couple hundred feet off the ground (the Naval Annex was on a hill above him) could easily have been the decoy aircraft flying Over the Naval Annex and North of the Citgo. Thompson saw the fireball, but not the alleged aircraft crash into the 1st floor. As anyone can see, the Pentagon itself was below the hill out of sight of Thompson.








[edit on 1/8/09 by SPreston]

The eyewitnesses to the crash of AA77 are verified and proven.

It has been proven that Morin could not have seen a jet pass over him if he was where CIT placed him.

Proven.

We're just waiting for CIT to concede they've been wrong all along.

Sorry to ruin your day again, SPreston.

Eyewitnesses and lack of them are completely on topic. Remember, it is CIT's obligation to demonstrate its claims.

Spreston, you are being dishonest sir. The photo you clipped from Google Maps you can not confirm that it is Thompson's POV. You chose almost the furthest point away from the Pentagon. Thompson stated that he could see the roof of the Pentagon. Him along with hundreds of other commuters that were in traffic. Could he see the impact? Not likely. Would have seen the plane fly to the south, up, and over the Pentagon?
YES!

Does he mention seeing the plane fly around the impact and over the roof that he had a clear view of?

NO!

Is he a NOC witness?

NO!

Did any of those hundreds of commuters sitting in traffic observe a fly over?

No!

The following is a picture I clipped from your source (google maps). As you can see, while a little closer to the Pentagon the location of this photograph is still next to the Navy Annex. There is a crystal clear view of the Pentagon roof from this area. As Thompson stated.



View of the Navy Annex from above photo.




Another point:

The weather. On 911 it was a crisp clear day at the Pentagon. This photograph Preston used(no fault of his) was taken on a cloud covered, somewhat hazy day. Visibility is obviously not as good as it was on 911.

The following is just an example of how clear the weather was. Minimal clouds, no haze, perfect visibility.





[edit on 8-1-2009 by CameronFox]

Read the thread title. Read the content of the original post.

Nothing is mentioned of any flyover witnesses. It is off topic.

This thread is about specific witnesses who might have seen a SOC approach. That's it.

You tried to drag it off topic by discussing a flyover, which is specifically not the topic of this thread.

CameronFox you are being much too critical . . . too defensive. The point of this thread is that a large portion of the mystical '104 witnesses to the Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon' that government loyalists and defenders like to throw at us, do not exist. Some overly imaginative Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY fanatics even throw the figure of 'hundreds of crash witnesses' at us don't they?

Oh yeah, CameronFox I forgot to mention that your photo is in the westbound lanes of I-395 and much closer to the Naval Annex; a minor infraction but not completely honest either? Correct, since you were slinging mud?

The reason I moved Thompson back on the highway a bit is because there is a curve there on I-395, and since this alleged Flight 77 was officially moving at 784 fps, I thought Thompson would more likely see it if his car was facing it a bit more. I was debating with myself on which position would make more sense. Both positions showed the roof of the Pentagon and both positions were opposite the Naval Annex. At 784 fps, if Thompson caught a movement out of the corner of his eye, in the second it took to turn his head, the aircraft would no longer be Over the Naval Annex would it? His car was still opposite the Naval Annex in my image, but facing it a bit more, and since we all know for sure now that the actual aircraft was flying Over the Naval Annex; then Phillip Thompson is another witness to the decoy aircraft flying Over the Naval Annex isn't he? He said the aircraft was a couple of hundred feet off the ground, and I assume it meant the ground at his location which was below the Naval Annex hill. That would place the aircraft higher than the Naval Annex, and apparently he saw it after it had passed the taller Sheraton, and he never stated he saw it come between his view and a building did he? Therefore Over the Naval Annex.

Craig have you been able to find Phillip Thompson and reinterview him on video? Of course the actual decoy aircraft was moving much slower; perhaps half the speed. (270 mph - 395 fps) Thompson may have watched it for 10 whole seconds and it apparently never left his sight until the explosion. No, apparently Thompson is another witness that the light poles were staged.



Then we find out that MilitaryCity.com which services the four military journals owned by major propaganda corporation Gannett News Services added this lie above to Phillip Johnson's original account. Didn't they? Can you explain why they lied? Why did MilitaryCity.com add that little lie when Thompson explicitly stated he could see the roof of the Pentagon? And we all know the aircraft was supposed to have struck at the ground level which was 77 feet below the roof, don't we?

Thompson had about 5 seconds at 784 fps to watch the decoy aircraft Over the Naval Annex a couple of hundred feet off the ground before the explosion at the Pentagon. He did not say a word about it diving down the hill did he? What he said was "the plane looked as if it were coming in for a landing — cruising at a shallow angle, wings level, very steady" didn't he? Not one word about the decoy aircraft flying out of sight behind the hill because it needed to dive down in order to strike the #! and #2 light poles. How come Thompson never lost sight of the aircraft before the explosion? Because it never dived down the hill? Because it never struck the light poles?

So Phillip Thompson never did see the crash into the Pentagon did he? So why didn't he see the flyover? Perhaps like everybody else, his eyes automatically focused on the bright explosion, ignoring everything else. Or perhaps he did see the flyover and the FBI paid him a visit. The FBI was paying lots of visits to witnesses, confiscating films and videos, and informing people of what they saw were't they? For several days; weeks; months; years? They had agents guarding Lloyde England and his staged taxi withing several seconds didn't they? How could the FBI or whichever agency those guards belonged to, be already out of their cars photographed by Jason Ingersoll guarding the scene, if they were not prepared beforehand and on stage ready to go into action long before the explosion at the Pentagon? Perhaps the FBI made sure that Thompson understood that it was an American Airlines jet he saw too. Sometimes people do not understand what they see, and the J Edgar Hoover trained political arm FBI role is to make sure they do understand perfectly. Can't have incorrect information confusing The People can we?

CameronFox you do agree that many of the alleged witnesses to the Pentagon crash cannot possibly be actual witnesses don't you, as I pointed out in my OP? Why is it you chose to ignore the OP and instead focused on Phillip Thompson? Is your little dream world falling to pieces?



[edit on 1/9/09 by SPreston]

Isn't that what you CIT and CIT wannabes preach? Critical thinking?



Yes, and you were less than 100% honest in your post. I am calling you on it.



If you learn to read some day sir, you will see in my post that I took the photos from the same source as you did. See that the cars are coming WEST, the members here can tell what side of the highway the photo is from. I then took it a step further to show that the ANNEX was still "right next to" the location on the map by posting a picture from the exact same spot. There is nothing dishonest about it. Again, I clearly state that it was closer.

I am not mud slinging here. But you are making unfounded accusations and are calling a witness a liar without ANY evidence what so ever.

This would be the 2nd witness where you make a mistake.

First of all, don't think that the members at ATS are naive enough to not know that literally thousands of pounds of debris from plane crashed can survive without being burned.

Look at where you placed her car. She did not say that she was there. You are placing her there to fit CIT/PFT's Fantasy Flight.

Read what she said about the plane. She looked out the drivers side window and saw the nose of a plane.





By your picture here, she would have had to be looking almost behind her to see the plane coming from the F.F.P. (fantasy flight path)

Nah. Thompson never states he lost sight of the aircraft does he? You just made that up out of desperation CameronFox. Seems to me that if I was an eyewitness, I would tell everything I saw, and if the FBI told me to tell something different; then I would tell them to go to hell. This was a horrendous crime against America by somebody, and I would not lie for anyone.

So Thompson claims he saw the aircraft come in at a shallow angle and wings level and very steady. Thompson is badly mistaken or pretending he was an eyewitness, because neither aircraft flew like that. According to multiple eyewitnesses, the decoy aircraft banked to the right after passing Over the Naval Annex. According to the Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY the aircraft dived down the hill out of sight to the lawn in order to hit the light poles. From Thompson's view, the #1 and #2 light poles would be invisible. That is not what Thompson described.

In his place I would have stated the aircraft tilted down and disappeared and several seconds later I saw an explosion. But Thompson stated the aircraft come in at a shallow angle and wings level and very steady. It never dived down out of sight. Thompson is not a Flight 77 crash witness.

Well gee willikers CameronFox; there is a question mark after me asking if she is another North of Citgo eyewitness isn't there? We have already established with 20+ eyewitnesses that the actual aircraft flew Over the Naval Annex haven't we? So Penny Elgas stated that she saw the aircraft next to and above the Citgo Station she did not know was there before. That sure does not sound the same as seeing it between Hwy I-395 and Columbia Pike does it? There is not one eyewitness specifically placing the aircraft on the official flight path south of Columbia Pike and South of the VDOT antenna is there? The 9-11 Pentagon OFFICIAL STORY really sucks for you guys lately doesn't it?



And now that you mention it, there is also not one single eyewitness in the entire state of Virginia, or likely not in the entire world who actually saw, or photographed, or even videotaped that aircraft descending in that tight loop southwest of the Pentagon. You know; that loop they faked the Flight 77 FDR and 84 RADES data for?



This loop is so bogus; it stinks to high heaven. The actual aircraft was east of the Potomac and over DC, not making this fake loop over Alexandria and Fairfax southwest of the Pentagon. And it has been proven that the C-130 was not way down there to the southwest as depicted by the faked 84 RADES data.

I don't know if Penny Elgas is a real witness or an incompetent shill; but keeping that piece of crime scene evidence for herself seems kind of suspicious doesn't it? I don't blame Craig for being distrusting of her. Besides he has plenty of eyewitnesses placing the aircraft Over the Naval Annex and North of the Citgo doesn't he? About 20 more than you have placing the aircraft on the official south flight path. Does that sound about right CameronFox?

CameronFox were you planning on addressing the main points in my OP? The 13 - Corporate owned paid propagandists enlisted to control the American people most of them owned body and soul by Gannett News Services? Geeze Jamie McIntyre was there and got caught lying. I wonder how he stayed off that list of Pentagon Crash Witness Accounts?

Or the 3 at Reagan Metro platform where view was blocked by high buildings in Crystal City. How did these people get on your list when they could not possibly have seen the light poles nor an aircraft gliding across the Pentagon lawn at 535 mph?

Or the 6+ - not crash witnesses whose views were blocked by buildings; the Sheraton and the hill, and the 77 ft tall Pentagon building because the light poles and alleged aircraft were on the opposite side?

Is all this stuff scaring you CameronFox; is that why you have been avoiding it?

Wow Preston. You get stuck and called on with your posts and you call in the evil FBI and tell everyone how tough you would be with the big bad bush regime.
All that and you avoid any type of response.

reply to post by SPreston

---

You know SPreston, I don't know how you can say that the eyewitnesses don't exist or were all mistaken or tricked or they lied or whatever. First off I don't know anyone who would mistake something like this going over them:


or this



or the best one here:


And then, how can they not see something like this:
www.youtube.com...
And miss the pull up and over or any other "decoy" plane flying low anywhere,

Or notice the AA 757 doing this AFTER the explosion and fireball:



Oh and by the way, I like your little image of the two 757s "over the annex". Now one thing I am surprised you didn't consider at all is this, what angle were the eyewitness looking at the approaching 757? Were they exactly right there on that exact spot? Or were they maybe a little farther up the road or down the road just enough so it might have LOOKED LIKE it flew "over" the annex instead of past it, behind it, in front of it? You know, perspective is very important in this case.

And yet you ridicule CameronFox on having certain witnesses who had part of their view blocked and not being able to see the plane or the impact, while you completely ignore all the other eyewitness accounts that DID see the AA 757 fly over and HIT the Pentagon, and at the same time neither you nor CIT Ranke can produce ONE eyewitness or picture or video of any 757s doing a magical high-G climb and turn over the parking lot right after the explosion when practically ALL EYES in a surrounding 5 mile radius would turn and look at the Pentagon at the same time to see WTF just happened.

People are not that stupid nor are they that incapable to miss something as a huge as a large 757 flying up and over the Pentagon after a huge fireball. Somebody looking over the Pentagon from the other side would have seen it, where are they? Unless you expect me to believe that they were forced to keep quite under penalty of death by the CIA/FBI/NSA/NWO/Illuminotii/Mickey Mouse Club. That would be a very convenient excuse not to produce any witnesses for your "theory".

Well golly gee gomer, I answered your question then didn't I?







You mean your paranoid rant? How can anyone address that?

I mean really... look at this gem from you:

Is all this stuff scaring you CameronFox; is that why you have been avoiding it?

scared? no.... bothered... yes.