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

So she HAD to sue somebody huh? Okay, so let's go with ummmmmmm...DIck Cheney et al. WHat? Case thrown out? Okaaaaayyyy, uuuummmmmmm...American Airlines. Gotta switch my story though.

ZERO CREDIBILITY emblazened on her forehead from that point on. Don't even consider her story people. It only makes our job of exposing the coverup harder. People like that, no matter how good the story is, just needs to be tossed out during the vetting.

Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by Yukitup

 

And I have three friends who were at the Pentagon that day. One who now wears a Purple Heart for the injuries he suffered that day as Flight 77 slammed into the building close to his office. The other two spent that day involved in search and rescue. All three of them know exactly what hit the building, all three of them saw plane wreckage. Two of them saw what was left of human beings, strapped into what was left of airline seats. I will take their words over the words of a frustrated, poorly advised, money hungry secretary any day.

Thank you for addressing and clarifying your previous fallacies and misdirection so astutely. The fact that you have friends that were at the Pentagon that day does indeed appear to fully dispatch any lingering issues relating to the above referenced ad hominem attack, non sequitur conclusion, affirmation of the consequent, etc.

Because you have friends that were there on 9/11, and one of them has a purple heart, you and your position are beyond reproach. (the classic appeal to authority fallacy ALWAYS gets me, I give up -- you win!!!).

Side note: your friends are not on trial here - and their honor is not at issue (in the event that your position re Ms. Gallop is in any way spurred by a need to support/defend your friends' perception of that day's events by discrediting Ms. Gallop because her perceptions might differ from your friends').

Impeaching the credibility of Ms. Gallop to discredit her testimony re what she saw on 9/11 is a valid tactic (depending upon your agenda, I guess), I am simply addressing blatant fallacies that are preventing a proper impeachment.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Oh come on! Who is twisting your arm and forcing you to come on this site if we all show such "colossal ignorance of history?"

In fact, history shows over and over again the shady claims of government officials and the real truths of events that get locked up and hidden from citizens only to come out 25-45 years later.

Ignorance? I think not.

Let's stick to the subject and stop name calling, shall we?

And how come all your minion on this board have so many "friends" in the Pentagon on that day? It's very shady to say the least.

reply to post by vipertech0596


Actually in the video, the missile and explosion were in the SAME frame at one point. Look it up on youtube for someone's analysis of it. I don't have the link currently and am not willing to go thru 1,400+ youtube videos about the witnesses and missile striking the Pentagon.

From her lawsuit against Cheney , et al , :

Plaintiff ... suffered substantial head and brain injuries, which seriously affect ... still today.

The lawsuit alleges bombs , airplanes , and missiles . Her and her vipers were covering all bases , it would seem .

She collected money from the airplane inclusion . Only thing left after that was to try to collect on the bombs and missiles inclusions .

The woman is clearly , as they say , following the money .

Wonder how much she was paid for that lie-ridden interview ?

justgetthere.us...

As ive said a gazzillion times before. My avatar shows you the real smoking gun. Say it with me now, AIR BURST.

That is all

reply to post by Seti_Starr


Set Starr, on page 1 you said this about April Gallop's OP interview : " her experience and eyewitness account is quite valid ."

Can you therefore address the fact that she said she exited the Pentagon at " the place of initial impact " when this was plainly impossible and negates her observations about lack of seats, luggage etc ?

reply to post by Alfie1


Yes, let me do so by saying that if I had gone through what she had, I would have gone through the first opening to get out of there! Obviously there was no plane there since she was able to get out in the first place.

Your point proves nothing.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Seti_Starr

 

Set Starr, on page 1 you said this about April Gallop's OP interview : " her experience and eyewitness account is quite valid ."

Can you therefore address the fact that she said she exited the Pentagon at " the place of initial impact " when this was plainly impossible and negates her observations about lack of seats, luggage etc ?

Do you have proof that there were seats, bodies, airplane parts? Please provide photos, but not that unburned piece of whatever on that perfect lawn we've all seen. I understand it might be gory but it's your responsibility, I'll be waiting.

Originally posted by Seti_Starr
reply to post by Alfie1

 

Yes, let me do so by saying that if I had gone through what she had, I would have gone through the first opening to get out of there! Obviously there was no plane there since she was able to get out in the first place.

Your point proves nothing.

So, you would have gone through this as your quickest way out ?

911review.org...

Can you explain to me how ?

reply to post by Alfie1


FACT: April Gallop was there.
FACT: She got out.

Originally posted by Seti_Starr
reply to post by Alfie1

 

FACT: April Gallop was there.
FACT: She got out.

I agree with both those facts but where is bit about how she got out through a blazing inferno ?

Plainly she didn't because she couldn't have survived and it is quite contrary to human nature to try to move toward the smoke and heat. She obviously got out somewhere else and that part of her OP interview must be untrue.

The fact that you have to cling to April Gallop's story, while ignoring the testimony of Lt Col O'Brien who actually saw AA 77, confirms for me that you are the sort of truther who just wants to pursue the "truth" if it accords with your pre-conceived conspiracy theories.

Im just gonna throw this in here for you boys and girls who havent had the pleasure of viewing this fantastic image of the pentagon wall before the collapse. ENJOY.

img196.imagevenue.com...

If I was working in the Pentagon and got bombed along with my son, I would try suing the people I knew were responsible too. However, If I failed, I would still be very angry at the injustice and would sue the next person in line. An injustice for an injustice.

I believe what she says.

The debunkers in this thread really need to put pictures of themselves and ID on here for me to even take them seriously. I bet they won't or they would get fired..from their job.

Originally posted by TylerKing

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Seti_Starr

 

Set Starr, on page 1 you said this about April Gallop's OP interview : " her experience and eyewitness account is quite valid ."

Can you therefore address the fact that she said she exited the Pentagon at " the place of initial impact " when this was plainly impossible and negates her observations about lack of seats, luggage etc ?

Do you have proof that there were seats, bodies, airplane parts? Please provide photos, but not that unburned piece of whatever on that perfect lawn we've all seen. I understand it might be gory but it's your responsibility, I'll be waiting.

You haven't seen any ? You cant have looked very far !

Why don't you have a little stroll through the Moussaoui trial exhibits :-

www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

reply to post by Alfie1



How about 220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement and Government Officials who would love to debate Lt Col O'Brien's version of the truth:

patriotsquestion911.com...

reply to post by Alfie1


I am sick of this “truther” crap. We are stereotyped as “truthers” because we want the TRUTH, not because we have “pre-conceived conspiracy theories” about the events that took place.

Obviously, the disinformation campaign against people seeking true information about what happened on 9/11 has worked. Anyone that doesn’t believe the government’s official story 100% is now considered an anti-American, conspiracy-crazed, misinformed “truther.” It won’t be long until “truthers” are considered a threat to national security and will be labeled as homegrown terrorists.

We are not trying to write our own play about the events of 9/11 to fit into our little worlds. We just want the facts and the truth, which are obviously something we have not been told.

reply to post by whaaa


That is a great point. How does the Pentagon not have cameras ALL over the place.

Originally posted by splint
The debunkers in this thread really need to put pictures of themselves and ID on here for me to even take them seriously. I bet they won't or they would get fired..from their job.

I doubt that is their job because they are so poor at it.

anyways,

I know that if I was injured in the attacks, regardless of whether or not I personally think it was a boeing, I would still sue American Airlines because the government says that is the cause of the attacks. If enough people were suing AA, they might launch their own investigation in an attempt to prove they were not responsible.

Originally posted by Alfie1
You haven't seen any ? You cant have looked very far !
Why don't you have a little stroll through the Moussaoui trial exhibits :-
www.vaed.uscourts.gov...

Ok I did just look for plane parts in the link you provided, but there is really only 1 of the area claimed to be the pentagon, and it's hardly definitive. If that one image were actually considered evidence, I think the bar for evidence needs to be raised a little higher. Given that so many "witnesses" though they saw a plane, why does no one have any kind of decent pictures? Certainly not the link provided.
The previous image of the front impact area of the pentagon is a lot more convincing. which..seems to have been removed...but I saved a copy if anyone wants it

..Ex