Pentagon Survivor April Gallop: "It's obvious the official story was fabricated..."

So there was no plane, why? I still cannot see why this fabrication was perpetrated. It seems they should have used a plane, to be more credible. They cost about as much as a missile.

reply to post by earthdude

Interesting question and one that shouldn't just be fobbed off. I believe 9/11 was an inside job and was planned as meticulously as the brains involved could plan it. They made mistakes but it's not unreasonable to assume that they had good (good enough for them) reasons for everything they did, including using a plane at the Pentagon.

Using only planted explosives or a missile, without a covering "mask" (the plane) would have made the idea of an inside job obvious. Hence the use of a plane was necessary.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by ipsedixit

 

First she tries to pass herself off as an Officer,

Isn't one who works in an office an "officer". Just joking. I don't have the time or interest to look into this aspect of the story. If it's true and a lie, it was unwise, since it would be absurdly easy to expose a lie like that. Rank in the military can be a floating thing depending on circumstances, but I'm not trying to defend her on that charge. I'll grant you the point. It may go to witness credibility, but not far, in my view.

Then she tries to claim that she was given a personal tour of the super secret defenses of the Pentagon, now she says she was "told" about them.

Was she seriously trying to deceive with the first story or speaking imprecisely until made to be specific? Again, this would amount to a fish story, if true.

Then she tries to sue everyone.......

She was poorly advised, I believe. It hardly goes to her character.

She said she didn't see bodies, other than those of co-workers, luggage or airplane parts, including seats. She walked out of the hole the plane was supposed to have entered through. She said she wasn't covered in jet fuel and saw no evidence of the presence of an aircraft.

Did anyone anywhere see burning people running out of the building on fire from jet fuel?

Watch the Fox footage at archive.org and you will see that the black smoke associated with the Pentagon fire is coming from a very, very small fire in the diesel generator parked in front of the building and not from the building at all. That fire could have been put out in five minutes, yet was allowed to burn for a very long time, probably well over an hour. Is that what they call a cosmetic burn? It looked very impressive on the news and no doubt helped to convince people that a jet fuel fire had occurred at the Pentagon, but as Ms. Gallop knows, no such thing happened.

I just want to remind everyone that when April Gallop says "It's obvious the official story was fabricated...", be aware from what perspective she says that. From someone with top secret clearance, who could have seen defenses she can't even talk about- and she has said that in so many words...She knows more than she can say. From someone who was chosen to be there because of her exemplary job performance.

In other words, she is saying that from an on-site, insider, hands-on perspective that none of us can, or ever will see. Certainly more credible than any Q-Group wannabe or paid shill.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


She was an administrative assistant. In other words, a secretary. And yes, even in the military, sometimes the secretaries have to have security clearances. However, those clearances still come with need to know attached to them. And she would not have had the need to know about building defenses, even the imaginary ones.

And yes, in the first go around with her, she clearly stated she got a personal tour. No imprecise speaking, she stated it flat out and stuck by it when repeatedly questioned.


BTW, I am a paid member of the Z-Group

reply to post by vipertech0596


WOW for your admission to being a paid member of the Z-Group!
I wasn't going to say anything but I looked at your profile and saw your many posts. They were all 9/11 posts!

You may be the Z-Group, but April Gallo with her security clearance is still ALPHA-Group.

Her word wins over yours.


*********No trolling allowed**********

reply to post by TrueAmerican

From someone with top secret clearance, who could have seen defenses she can't even talk about

Lets not spin her into some super secretive spy that "can't speak because..." as many do regarding anything about 911. Her clearance was compartmented to her job, nothing more. But it makes her a savior figure to those who want to portray 911 as some sort of mass conspiracy...it very well may be but, one admin secretary does not a conspiracy make! Although many will try to. She had her top secret clearance because she had to handle papers, book works, reports and such of her bosses which dealt with a variety of issues, some of which were secret. Many conspiracy types cannot put this together simply because they do not know abqout it because they have never had any clearance of their own nor understand that just because someone has any clearance at all does not mean they can go into any building they want to or area requiring such creds. It does not work that way.

In my opinion, she is milking her position for whatever she can get out of it. Nothing more folks.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
IIn other words, she is saying that from an on-site, insider, hands-on perspective that none of us can, or ever will see. Certainly more credible than any Q-Group wannabe or paid shill.

You seem to have missed my earlier post. Nevermind, I have two simple questions for you.

Is she more credible than the firefighters who put the fire out? How about the teams that recovered and analysed the DNA of remains in the Pentagon?

reply to post by mikelee


With all due respect, in the court of law, she would be considered a witness and an expert (with inside information), working for one of the highest establishments in this country. She is not an idiot and yes, why not, let's make her into a larger figure in this context....because she is! You were not there. I was not there. I would believe someone that was actually there! Makes sense, no?

I don't think it's a mater of us clinging to her words....we've got hundreds more questions of the OS to go on with or without April Gallop's testimony. The video of what she was saying was VERY powerful. For all of us who are searching for the answers, this was a very important part of what's missing from the big picture.

Originally posted by Seti_Starr
You were not there. I was not there. I would believe someone that was actually there! Makes sense, no?

Sure, this makes perfect sense.

I assume then you agree with the 100 or so people who saw a plane, the few who were nearly hit by it, the firefighters who found people strapped into seats, the teams who identified the remains by DNA etc.

These people were all actually there, and much more involved in the matter than this woman. Somehow I doubt you will believe these people quite as strongly.

reply to post by Seti_Starr


She would in no way be considered an expert at all. According to her own statement,.she was inside holding her child and walked thru the impact point afterward. She states "there was no plane" but how many mothers linger around a horrific site such as that trying to determine if it was a plane or not all the while holding her baby? Sounds more like a passive statement rather than one of fact, any person with common sense would get that. Except those looking for the conspiracy speculation aspect.

Just so you are clear on one thing, I have seen many photos taken by my former colleagues who were at the Pentagon on 911 taken on their personal phones, pdas and regular cameras and have no doubt an airplane crashed there. The people who were there and participated in the rescue of people who were injured have no doubt either. Its always those who were "a little off" in distance as well as mindset who claim otherwise.

Has anyone ever seen a video of the plane hitting the Pentagon?

You’d think that each of the five sides of the headquarters of the Department of Defense would have multiple cameras including cameras pointing outwards and away from the Pentagon instead of parallel to its outer walls. You'd think that the even the Pentagon's parking lot would have multiple cameras capable of recording the attack. However, apparently every Wal-Mart in America has more cameras in each parking lot, on the exterior of each building, and inside each store than the headquarters of the biggest military ever in the existence of mankind does.

They’ve got it on tape, but they are withholding the footage due to National Security reasons. This only proves that they are covering their hides as the footage they have disproves their official report.

At least one person from that attack has the will to stand up for what they physically experienced instead of what they were told they experienced.

reply to post by mikelee


Who ever said I trust our government's OS and the media? And their DNA tests?

We are simply in 2 camps now and no one on either side is flexible. I can not pretend to go back to sleep to make anyone happy. Why would it be hard for me to believe that those 100 people were either paid, or created out of thin air or simply never existed? Our government hires tens of thousands of personnel on projects at any given time, no biggie.
It's not a matter of details anymore, it's about your mind either being asleep, awake or paid for.

If April Gallop's testimony doesn't hold up for you, then your former colleagues with their personal pads, phones and regular cameras doesn't do it for me either.

Why don't they put everything to rest and publish their photos of the plane that crashed? Prove us all wrong. Oh right! The government probably confiscated those pictures too!

I rather enjoy being a bit "off in the distance." I am Seti Starr.

reply to post by tooo many pills


Interesting point. Steal something from Wally World and you will be on camera inside and outside the store, in multiple angles, yet fly a plane into the Pentagon and it's not caught at all? Better yet, if it was, it's not released to the world? Yeah, sure, that makes sense.

The OS is a load of BS. Plain and simple.

reply to post by Seti_Starr

I am Seti Starr

No. You are confused.

I do not believe the OS no more than you or anyone else. Don't believe me? Read my threads then, you'll get an idea. What is missing from all of this conspiracy hoopla is common sense based in the fact that the gov has not been forthcoming with everything they know. Once upon a time I fell for the likes of a missile strike at the Pentagon based on some compelling photos depicting the lack of plane parts. Only after attending a reunion of former folks I once worked with and trust without question, did I finally see some of their own photos they took that day at the scene and convinced me that all of this "loose change" based crap full of half truths and edited videos finally come into perspective. I do not pretend to know how to fly a plane and maneuver it the way that the hijacker(s) did but for me, I have some closure as to what really happened based upon a simple reunion of people whom I spoke with about what they did or dind't see on 911. In my opinion the real conspiracy is being perpetuated by those who do not understand what they see and are gullible at the hands of people who have more time at the editing table and do not understand either, what they see or do not see. The internet is full of basically the same tired old photos and videos citing missing airplanes in the Pentagon gate video which to me, also seemed a little odd to say the least. Why the gov doesn't release more footage from not only that camera but several others that I have seen myself I cannot understand nor answer. Thats IS a good question and I have asked it to people I know who work there. Their reply? They do not know either but they also would like an answer also because they too, are tired of the theorys that abound yet they themselves know for a fact what happened.
My opinion is that we will never know what really went on that day and its good to keep on searching as I have. For one incident that happened on 911 I know what happened without any doubt any longer. I feel lucky to have that closure on that particular incident. When I look back at the global hawk thread I did on the Pentagon I smile because even though some of the GH theory and pics do make sense, I now know it did not happen that way compelling as it may have seemed to me at the time. I hope one day you to discover your own truth as I have as well as other folks too. I now know a plane crashed into the Pentagon, two planes struck the WTC towers but I'm still not convinced about flight 93. That is another story in and of itself and I know one day THAT will come out.

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by Seti_Starr

 

She would in no way be considered an expert at all. According to her own statement,.she was inside holding her child and walked thru the impact point afterward. She states "there was no plane" but how many mothers linger around a horrific site such as that trying to determine if it was a plane or not all the while holding her baby? Sounds more like a passive statement rather than one of fact, any person with common sense would get that. Except those looking for the conspiracy speculation aspect.

Just so you are clear on one thing, I have seen many photos taken by my former colleagues who were at the Pentagon on 911 taken on their personal phones, pdas and regular cameras and have no doubt an airplane crashed there. The people who were there and participated in the rescue of people who were injured have no doubt either. Its always those who were "a little off" in distance as well as mindset who claim otherwise.

edit on 10/7/2010 by mikelee because: Add text

LMAO....Camera phones in 2001? They didn't even become available commercially til 2004 and PDA's, well, slightly after that. But go on and brag about your "colleagues" at the Pentagon. Bull# smells like bull#, espicially when you're caught in a bold-face lie.

reply to post by mikelee

Why the gov doesn't release more footage from not only that camera but several others that I have seen myself I cannot understand nor answer.

You've seen multiple, unreleased videos from security cameras at various vantage points around the Pentagon showing the plane’s flight trajectory and the initial point of impact?

Could you share and elaborate on the classified information you have witnessed please?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
I just want to remind everyone that when April Gallop says "It's obvious the official story was fabricated...", be aware from what perspective she says that. From someone with top secret clearance, who could have seen defenses she can't even talk about- and she has said that in so many words...She knows more than she can say. From someone who was chosen to be there because of her exemplary job performance.

That's th problem with her statements, right there- we DO know what perspective she's sayign that by: it's 100% personal opinion, without any facts to back the claim up. She was inside the building when it hit, and she openly admitted herself she didn't know what had happened until she was already at the hospital. She likewise said her first and foremost priority after the event was to find her infant son, so she wouldn't have noticed any signs of an aircraft impact even if they were there. Same with the supposed Pentagon defenses- she never saw any defenses herself, but were simply told about them. There's no record that the person who told her about the defenses had any clue what they were talking about either.

Personally, I think Alex Jones or one of any number of 9/11 conspiracy snake oil pedlers suckered her on the idea of there being some conspiracy and she swallowed it hook line and sinker. You can see right away in her lawsuit against Cheney and "unknown John Does" that it's entirely featureless- she has no idea of any of the actual details of this supposed conspiracy she's basing her lawsuit on. Moreover, her own opinion seems to change periodically- one day she's claiming the planes were allowed to strike the Pentsagon, and now she's claiming no planes struck the pentagon at all. She clearly isn't going by any single viewpoint or position.

Quoting her on anything is of dubious value.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


To answer your question, are those who work at the Pentagon somehow not covered by worker's comp?

I need to finish reading the rest of the thread before I go on. I will say that, imo, it is damaging to her image that she sued anyone- as if she was exploiting the situation for financial gain. That is not helpful in trying to get at the truth.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Same with the supposed Pentagon defenses- she never saw any defenses herself, but were simply told about them. There's no record that the person who told her about the defenses had any clue what they were talking about either.

Now I know some people at the Pentagon may be incompetent, but if they are having people that have no clue what they are talking about giving tours of their defenses to top-secret-cleared staff like April, then I guess us truther's continual bitch that no one has been fired for gross negligence or held responsible for 9/11 applies all the more, doesn't it. And waterboarded confessions don't count, so don't even go there.

Personally, I think Alex Jones or one of any number of 9/11 conspiracy snake oil pedlers suckered her on the idea of there being some conspiracy and she swallowed it hook line and sinker.

Well personally, I just think she got so desperate with nowhere else to turn that she ended up having to settle for some not-so-great attorneys who didn't approach her case with the right angles to have some real teeth. Framed beggars can't be choosers.

Quoting her on anything is of dubious value.

Oh, well I should have known! :shk: More character assassination. Is that all you've got? Don't you think that we're seeing right through that now? It's a little more like quoting you is of increasingly dubious value- and you were already off the scale.