Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"Flight 93" Eyewitnesses Prove No Boeing 757 Crashed In Shanksville on 911.

page: 8
3
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Not all of the witnesses in Washington that day actually saw the plane fly into the building by their own admission.


Yes and you also had witnesses that stated they were told later it was a 757 that hit the building by thier own admission.




posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
Not all of the witnesses in Washington that day actually saw the plane fly into the building by their own admission.


Yes and you also had witnesses that stated they were told later it was a 757 that hit the building by thier own admission.


So? How does that detract from the veracity of their statements? I may testify that I saw a late model blue sedan leaving the scene of a crime - how does being later told, or otherwise finding out, that the suspect drove a 2006 blue Ford Taraus invalidate my initial statement?

They also later learned that it was American Airlines Flight number 77, how does negate statements that they saw a big plane crashing into the Pentagon?

I can see how you are grasping at straws here, but you're arguments don't hold any water in the real world. But I suspect you know that by now.



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
So? How does that detract from the veracity of their statements?


Becuase he also states that him and another witness should have been able to tell what the plane was. Also the fact that he was told later completly affects the statement of what he saw.

His statement should be about what he saw and not what he was told later.






[edit on 28-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Each of these witnesses were spoken with after news reports had been on the air stating the OS. If these people were to have made their statements before any news reports then perhaps but considering that many people refer to them as "witnesses" is no more reliable than speaking to someone who was on the grassy knoll 25 years after the fact.

There are many websites that hold the same people in account to their saying that flight 93 was shot down, but I myself have never used those statements because they are unreliable to promote both, shooting down of 93 and "no plane" theory's.

There are many twists that can be placed on these people's statements either way. To cite them in any context of any particular theory is speculation at best and deception at worst. Take care, Mike

[edit on 3/28/2010 by mikelee]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE
Originally posted by hooper

Becuase he also states that him and another witness should have been able to tell what the plane was. Also the fact that he was told later completly affects the statement of what he saw.

His statement should be about what he saw and not what he was told later.


First, exactly who are we talking about here? Which statement?

And, as mikelee points out below these are statements made to the press, not police interragotories. Still doesn't detract from what they said.

Again, specifically to which statement are you referring?

There are dozens, most only refer to "a plane" some of witnesses were able to make out that it was an American Airlines plane some were able to tell it was a passneger plane, and I think one, a military officer at the Navy Annex thought it was either a 757 or an airbus. Now are we to dismiss all these statements because the press later reported that it was American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757?






[edit on 28-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Mar, 28 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee

There are many twists that can be placed on these people's statements either way. To cite them in any context of any particular theory is speculation at best and deception at worst. Take care, Mike

[edit on 3/28/2010 by mikelee]



That's why one doesn't do an investigation through cherry picking quotes.

One uses the totality of the evidence.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
First, exactly who are we talking about here? Which statement?


The witness statment already posted. I suggest you read whats posted.

For a witness statement to hold up in court it shuold be what the witness saw and not what they were told, thats called hearsay.

Eyewitness Accounts

Cook, Scott P. We didn’t know what kind of plane had hit the Pentagon, or where it had hit. Later, we were told that it was a 757 out of Dulles,

I cannot fathom why neither myself nor Ray, a former Air Force officer, missed a big 757, going 400 miles an hour, as it crossed in front of our window in its last 10 seconds of flight.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
First, exactly who are we talking about here? Which statement?


The witness statment already posted. I suggest you read whats posted.

For a witness statement to hold up in court it shuold be what the witness saw and not what they were told, thats called hearsay.

Eyewitness Accounts

Cook, Scott P. We didn’t know what kind of plane had hit the Pentagon, or where it had hit. Later, we were told that it was a 757 out of Dulles,

I cannot fathom why neither myself nor Ray, a former Air Force officer, missed a big 757, going 400 miles an hour, as it crossed in front of our window in its last 10 seconds of flight.






You choose the one witness who, by his own admission, wasn't a witness!!!!

It doesn't get any better.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 08:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


I agree and that is what I said as well. But with 911 the OS isn't evidence thats for sure. So we keep on searching then! Take care...Mike



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
You choose the one witness who, by his own admission, wasn't a witness!!!!


Its just too bad he is on the Pentagon witness list. So he is listed as a witness.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
You choose the one witness who, by his own admission, wasn't a witness!!!!


Its just too bad he is on the Pentagon witness list. So he is listed as a witness.



And exactly where is THE Pentagon witness list???

Whatever. If you actually paid attention to what he said, he said HE DIDN"T SEE THE PLANE.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
And exactly where is THE Pentagon witness list???


So funny, you did not even know there is a list of witnesses for the Pentagon.

Either you do not do any research or you are being dishonest so you do have to face the facts.

Here is one site with the list but you can find them on almsot any website.

911research.wtc7.net...


Whatever. If you actually paid attention to what he said, he said HE DIDN"T SEE THE PLANE.


But he is still on the witness list.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by REMISNE

Originally posted by hooper
And exactly where is THE Pentagon witness list???


So funny, you did not even know there is a list of witnesses for the Pentagon.

Either you do not do any research or you are being dishonest so you do have to face the facts.

Here is one site with the list but you can find them on almsot any website.

911research.wtc7.net...


Whatever. If you actually paid attention to what he said, he said HE DIDN"T SEE THE PLANE.


But he is still on the witness list.


You do realize, don't you, that there is a BIG difference between saying THE witness list and A list of witnesses.

But what's the point anyway? The guy says he didn't see the plane. He didn't see it. It was not seen by him. That is his witness. So what does it matter if he was told later that it was a Boeing Model 757? It is a moot point. It would not and could not influence his non-testimony regarding what he claims he did not see.



posted on Mar, 29 2010 @ 12:56 PM
link   
ive been in this area for almost a year now. I dont talk about it with people, but I have met alot of farmers. Noone I met ever saw it happen and I can tell you I never heard anyone say ANYTHING about windows breaking. Specially in barns. what barns have windows?? none of the barns i have seen out here have windows so I dont know where the information came from that all those windows were breaking. The people out here are a simple people who lead simple lives. Due to them being throwbacks could explain so many different stories though. There is alot of pollution out here which would cause these people to have poorly developed brains which is evident in their poor decision making skills evidenced by their lifestyle choices to live in squalor like savages. Its truly a thing to behold how people in the country live and see the true mind of a savage, its much akin to stumbling across a lost tribe in africa. Even if they saw a plane 99% of people here have never been on a plane or seen one in person because they fear modern technology.



posted on Mar, 31 2010 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
You do realize, don't you, that there is a BIG difference between saying THE witness list and A list of witnesses.


Please admit there is a witness list as stated. I have proven to you that i can post evidnece to support what i post, too bad you cannot.


The guy says he didn't see the plane. He didn't see it.


But he also stated that him and his Air Force friend SHOULD have seen it.



[edit on 31-3-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 07:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Shadow Herder

Originally posted by hooper
reply to


Are really that dense?

If you actually watched the video rather than add your 1 cent you would of heard her say " It banked to the right and crashed" (the van sized craft)

[edit on 26-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]



And the funniest thing with this video (and most of them are pretty funny) she never said what day this all happened!!!! She alluded to it by saying it was an upsetting day, but never said when this "observation" was made, date, time, etc.



That is probably one of the lamest responses from you and you have proven my point concerning the witnesses. None of the witnesses claim to have seen a Boeing 757 but actually they describe something much smaller which would explain the very small hole that could have not been caused by a Boeing 757.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



they describe something much smaller


Who is they? Besides this woman who talks about seeing an unidentified flying object at some indeterminate point in the pass, who else is contending that what they saw was "smaller"?



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



they describe something much smaller


Who is they? Besides this woman who talks about seeing an unidentified flying object at some indeterminate point in the pass, who else is contending that what they saw was "smaller"?


Where she saw what crashed was not "undetermined" but described in the video. She was one of the last persons to see what caused the crater and she described it as something not bigger that her van. This makes sense considering the very small crater in Shanksville is no where near the size required to have been caused by a massive Boeing 757 which has been proven earlier in this thread.



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Shadow Herder
 



Where she saw what crashed was not "undetermined" but described in the video. She was one of the last persons to see what caused the crater and she described it as something not bigger that her van. This makes sense considering the very small crater in Shanksville is no where near the size required to have been caused by a massive Boeing 757 which has been proven earlier in this thread.


You said "they". Where all the other statements from other persons? Who else said it was smaller than a van? You just keep jumping back to this one very poorly conducted and undocumented interview with a woman referring to some unidentified flying object that she observed in some undetermined point in the past and then use the word "they". They is used to refer to more than one person.

Finish those crater calcs yet? Anxious to see them. Suprised by your findings about the potential crater dyanmics in an impact-explosion crater?



posted on Apr, 2 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
You do realize, don't you, that there is a BIG difference between saying THE witness list and A list of witnesses.


Please admit there is a witness list as stated. I have proven to you that i can post evidnece to support what i post, too bad you cannot.


The guy says he didn't see the plane. He didn't see it.


But he also stated that him and his Air Force friend SHOULD have seen it.




[edit on 2-4-2010 by REMISNE]





new topics




 
3
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join