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.
Originally posted by Orion7911
So he's saying his perspective was to the left or (north?) of the Annex?
if so, then his angle wouldn't have permitted him to have properly judged whether the alleged plane was NOC or SOC. right?
Originally posted by SPreston
posted by BigSarge
While I have no idea if our Government was part of any conspiracy on 9/11, I can tell you 100% unequivically that it was an American Airlines plane that hit the Pentagon.
I can say this because at the time I was Soldier stationed at Ft. Myer, VA as a member of the US Army Honor Guard. We were conducting a funeral on 9-11-2001 in a section of Arlington cemetery that was right across from the Pentagon. We saw the plane come in from over the Naval Annex and seconds later watched the plane explode into the Pentagon. My group had been in the cemetery since early that morning and were unaware of the WTC attacks. We thought it was just a terrible accident.
How could the aircraft you allegedly saw have hit the Pentagon 1st floor if you saw it flying Over the Naval Annex? You do understand the difficulties involved in order for an aircraft to get from the Naval Annex to a position through the five light poles laying on the ground, low and level across the lawn, and into the 1st floor without hitting the foundation below, don't you? It is impossible.
Twenty plus (20+) other eyewitnesses have placed the aircraft Over the Naval Annex; so your initial placement of the aircraft is quite accurate. However after the Naval Annex, the aircraft had to remain above the light poles and overhead highway sign in its path, because none of those light poles were knocked down or laying on the ground. The aircraft was much much too high to hit the 1st floor without damaging the foundation. In other words; the aircraft had to come in level with the 1st floor in order to not dive down into the foundation. But it was too high to enter the 1st floor and too far north to knock down the light poles to the south or to create the alleged damage path through the Pentagon interior.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bcecdf7f4305.jpg[/atsimg]
The FAA represents the true flight path rather well in its recent animation.
You do see why the official flight path through the light poles is irreconciliable with the actual flight path Over the Naval Annex which you and many other verified eyewitnesses saw, don't you?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1025b113dbed.jpg[/atsimg]
The official flight path just does not fit with the actual evidence nor with the verified living eyewitness accounts.
[edit on 26-6-2009 by Orion7911]
Originally posted by BigSarge
Really couldn't tell. Definitely was not over ANC and definitely was not further south than I-395..Somewhere in between...The plane WAS NOT level coming in but did not APPEAR to be banking. That also doesn't mean that it wasn't. It could have been, but it was moving so quickly it was not obvious from my standpoint.
...it DEFINITELY hit either the 1st or 2nd floor or both. Much of the higher floors were barely damaged on the inside, while the first floor and much of the second were for the most part gutted. And I'm not talking about the actual strike point, but for 100's of feet to the left and right inside the building.
Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
Plus we know the speed of the the plane was MUCH slower than officially reported since expert aviation professional witnesses Sean Boger and Terry Morin are corroborated by William Middleton as describing it between 8 and 15 seconds from the Navy Annex to the Pentagon.
Even if we go with 8 seconds that is less than half the official speed of 460 knots which would only take 3.4 seconds.
However you can't hold a witness to mathematical preciseness about such a detail.
The point is that he saw the plane IMMEDIATELY after the explosion.
We will never know if it was really 3, 4, or 7 seconds or whatever.
However you can't hold a witness to mathematical preciseness about such a detail.
...describing it between 8 and 15 seconds from the Navy Annex to the Pentagon.
Plus we know the speed of the the plane was MUCH slower than officially reported...
Even if we go with 8 seconds that is less than half the official speed of 460 knots which would only take 3.4 seconds.
EDIT: Already, only two and a half minutes in, and I can already see the delusion begin. Comparing pictures of the Air Garuda crash!!?? (Bet Craig doesn't even know the source of his crash 'comparison' photos nor why they are completely irrelevant to AAL77).
Now, I'm gonna need popcorn and a diet coke.....
Four minutes in, and it's still a load of buffalo flop. Cherry-picked damage photos, disingenuous 'assumptions', i.e., the PfffT claim of the 'impossibility' of the pull up from the 'dive'...well, then, if they wish to advocate a "fly-over" theory, how did this alleged "fly-over" occur without a pull-up afterwards?? (and a suddenly magically invisible airplane). Wonder Woman?
But wait, there's more! Insisting on the strike at the ground floor, when that is only coming from ONE possibility that was made into a computer simulation. Looking at the aftermath from the day or two after, NOT the one that Craig provides ten days later, you can see that the airplane impacted at floor two or three....
I wonder how "Operation Accountability" is coming along. I'll bet no one has sent this garbage to anyone.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
As an anonymous Internet avatar and binary code, of course you have no reason to believe me ---
Originally posted by BigSarge
It was dipping slightly left and right, it was not steady, so it may very well have been turning and/or not flying in a direct path.
Originally posted by Reheat
That 747 was an National Emergency Airborne Command Post (NEACP) that took off from Andrews. The AF won't release it's mission, but there is speculation that he was airborne in support of the President's return to Washington.
Originally posted by Reheat
There was nothing nefarious about it's presence or it's launch from Andrews at all in spite of Conspiracy Theorists attempts to make it into something mysterious.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by BigSarge
You're the one whose video was posted here:
Originally posted by BigSarge
Both ANC and the Naval Annex are above sea level while the Pentagon is quite a bit lower, down a hill so to speak.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
So, don't sit there and say you know exactly what that E-4B over DC was doing and that it wasn't nefarious. Unless you were actually onboard the E-4B, you have no clue.
Originally posted by Reheat
but I'll guarantee you it was not for some nefarious purpose...That is a preposterous and evil suggestion unless you have proof and you have none.