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.

 

The North Side Flyover - Officially Documented, Independently Confirmed

page: 51
206
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Good Job JT.

Well thought out. Just another piece of true info that further refutes the fantasy of CIT.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Outstanding analysis and good info to add to the avalanche of reasons CIT's complicated conglomeration of nonsense is wrong.

One area where I think you've misunderstood is Roosevelt Robert's muddled statements. As I understand what he said the aircraft he observed came from roughly the impact point (Rte 27), flew over ~ Lane 1 of the South Parking area, then turned toward the Mall Entrance to the Pentagon (not the Mall in Washington, DC) and departed to the SW. In other words it never flew across the Potomac River as you've stated in your analysis. To make this simpler and plainer he essentially said the aircraft came from the ~SW and did a U-turn over the Pentagon traveling back in the direction (SW) from which it came.

Of course, we then get the typical "clarification" by CIT of what he really meant to say in support of their fantasy to support a flyover.

Can you imagine a competent investigator using Robert's statements at all for anything? Can you imagine someone listening to this in a Courtroom?

If I've confused what he said, someone else (besides CIT) might take a stab and try to clarify it further. I don't intend to try and analyze it any more as it gives me a headache.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
reply to post by jthomas
 


Outstanding analysis and good info to add to the avalanche of reasons CIT's complicated conglomeration of nonsense is wrong.

One area where I think you've misunderstood is Roosevelt Robert's muddled statements. As I understand what he said the aircraft he observed came from roughly the impact point (Rte 27), flew over ~ Lane 1 of the South Parking area, then turned toward the Mall Entrance to the Pentagon (not the Mall in Washington, DC) and departed to the SW. In other words it never flew across the Potomac River as you've stated in your analysis. To make this simpler and plainer he essentially said the aircraft came from the ~SW and did a U-turn over the Pentagon traveling back in the direction (SW) from which it came.

Of course, we then get the typical "clarification" by CIT of what he really meant to say in support of their fantasy to support a flyover.

Can you imagine a competent investigator using Robert's statements at all for anything? Can you imagine someone listening to this in a Courtroom?

If I've confused what he said, someone else (besides CIT) might take a stab and try to clarify it further. I don't intend to try and analyze it any more as it gives me a headache.


Many thanks for that, Reheat. Indeed, Robert's muddled account leads to your interpretation. At the same time, CIT's (convenient?) interpretation was what I was going by:


Roosevelt is the critical first flyover witness. He did not see the Pentagon attack jet on the approach at all. He only saw it immediately after the explosion as it banked away from the Pentagon.

He was at the east side of the loading dock when he saw the plane over the south parking lot of the Pentagon.

Roosevelt says that the plane was 50 to less than 100 feet above the light poles in the south parking lot and was banking around. His exact direction of the bank is a bit unclear from the interview but it sounds as though he has it banking around to the north since he says towards the "mall entrance side" which is on the north side of the Pentagon.

He says "southwest" but we think his directions were confused at that moment since it sounds like he is struggling to visualize and verbalize the proper cardinal direction which is to be expected from eyewitness recollection. He does clarify further when he says it was not banking towards the airport meaning it wasn't banking southwest after all.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


CIT has so far refused my request for it to provide a "flyaway" flight path so I've done nothing more. But Craig has posted this picture with a "north side" flight path crossing the Pentagon here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If CIT were to stick to that flight path any attempt at extending it in any direction is going to lead to the same issue of lack of eyewitnesses - not to speak of exceeding aircraft capabilities you've already nailed CIT with - and I will be most happy to do another View Shed analysis .


Thanks, Reheat



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Soloist
If it flew over where in the world did the FDR come from? Think about that logically, step away from your computer and put away your hatred for the government for a minute.

Now that you're back, do you think that they simply took the FDR from the "flyover" plane and planted it at the scene? Does that sound about right?

Well, then why would they go through such a successful and elaborate "deception" and use the actual "flyover" plane's FDR?

Obviously the 9-11 perps did NOT use the FDR of the decoy aircraft. If they had, then the flight path would have been plotted east across the Potomac and over DC where it was witnessed by many, and then southeast and back across the Potomac in a bank around Reagan National. It would NOT have shown the faked loop southwest of the Pentagon which never happened and was NOT witnessed by one single person in all of Virginia.

Therefore the Flight 77 FDR was faked or flown by another aircraft at a different time and partially altered. Then 4 years later they manufactured the faked RADES data to support the collapsing faked FDR.

As to WHY they did stupid things; the 9-11 planners/perps must have figured that ALL Americans were stupid and blind enough to be easily duped and conned by their psyops scenarios. The numbers of the duped and ignorant Americans are rapidly decreasing.

The approximate flight path of the decoy aircraft crossing the Potomac and over DC and recrossing the Potomac and banking around Reagan and the approximate location of the C-130 at 9:37 am on 9-11-2001




posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

As to WHY they did stupid things; the 9-11 planners/perps must have figured that ALL Americans were stupid and blind enough to be easily duped and conned by their psyops scenarios. The numbers of the duped and ignorant Americans are rapidly decreasing.


Sweet Jesus.....This is fresh.


Yeah the United States while planning the largest conspiracy and mass murder in history, failed to realize that some Americans are not "stupid," "blind," or "easily duped."

Oh, and they forgot to plant correct FDR information.

Oh, OH!... and they hire an elderly cab driver as a secret agent!!!

Priceless



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Quite obviously, the 9-11 planners/perps erred quite seriously when they committed themselves to the wrong flight path for Flight 77. Once they had chosen the loop southwest of the Pentagon, and had it plastered all over the media, it was too late to go back and replace it with the real flight path over DC and banking around Reagan. Bad move.

Of course they still would have had to fake the Flight 77 FDR. But maybe they could have used the decoy aircraft FDR and moved the flight path south a 100 yards and cut off the end at the Pentagon wall and just maybe they would have fooled everybody. But they did not and their fake FDR has a fraudulent flight path and at the end is several hundred feet too high to possibly hit the Pentagon.

The FDR loop southwest of the Pentagon which never happened.
Official data from alleged Flight 77 black box FDR - nowhere near the river


The approximate flight path of the decoy aircraft crossing the Potomac and over DC and recrossing the Potomac and banking around Reagan and the approximate location of the C-130 at 9:37 am on 9-11-2001




posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

CIT has so far refused my request for it to provide a "flyaway" flight path so I've done nothing more. But Craig has posted this picture with a "north side" flight path crossing the Pentagon here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If CIT were to stick to that flight path any attempt at extending it in any direction is going to lead to the same issue of lack of eyewitnesses - not to speak of exceeding aircraft capabilities you've already nailed CIT with - and I will be most happy to do another View Shed analysis .


Here's what happened to the aircraft that attempted that turn he has depicted.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ThroatYogurt
 


it's called built-in incredulity.

it's been highly useful to debunkers like yourself.

however, lloyd's taxi was not hit by a light pole traveling at hundreds of miles an hour, and none of the other light poles hit the ground with any kind of force, either. there are no gouges in the amazing pentalawn.
physics says no plane hit those poles.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Why are we entertaining such minutia arguments? If there was a fly-over, wouldn’t the evidence be quite obvious?

(1)What happened to flight 77?
If flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, then where is it? Where is the plane – physically? Who disposed of the aircraft? Where was it disposed? How? We are talking about 110 tons of aircraft, engines, fuel, seats, trays, avionics, luggage, etc. Where are the eyewitnesses that saw the plane physically fly over the Pentagon? Where did it land after the fly over? Were the FAA radar operators “in on it” too? Where are the airport employees who saw the 110 ton airliner land, at the undisclosed location? Were they “in on it” too, or were they killed? If so, who killed them?

(2)What happened to the passengers and crew?
Where are the passengers? Were they all “in on it”? If not, who disposed of the passengers? Where were the disposed of? How have the disposers been keep quiet? Have the disposers been killed too? How have the disposers of the disposers been kept quiet? Where were the bodies taken/buried? How was this accomplished?

(3)How do you explain the phone calls from loved ones physically on the plane, to other loved ones?
Where the calls faked? From where? How were family members duped into thinking they were talking to their wife (for example) when in you’re claiming they were talking to a computer program? How do you reconcile that some of the phone calls went through cell phone towers very close to the so-called “official” flight path? How do you reconcile that some of the calls originated from the Airphones physically on the plane in question?

(4)How do you explain the wreckage found in the building?
If it was planted, how was it planted? Who planted it? When did they plant it? Where did they get spare aircraft parts? Where were these spare aircraft parts stored? How were they transported to the scene without anyone noticing? Were the parts in question placed beforehand? If so, how? How was this accomplished without anyone noticing?

(5)How do you account for the wreckage found on the lawn?
Were the parts found in the lawn placed beforehand ? If so, where are the witnesses talking about aircraft wreckage laying around on the lawn beforehand? Or, are “they” “in on it” too? Was the wreckage on the lawn placed after the event? If so, how were “they” able to accomplish this without anyone noticing? Or are the potential witnesses, after the event “in on it” too?

(6)How do you reconcile the impact location, as it relates to the evidence?
How were the perpetrators able to judge the exact location of impact, before the event? That is, how do you reconcile that the airplane debris in question is exactly where it should be?

(7)How do you reconcile the bodies of the passengers and crew being positively identified through DNA evidence collected from within the Pentagon?
Is the DNA evidence faked? If so, by whom? Is the lab that conducted the tests and certified it’s authenticity “in on it” too?

(8)How do you reconcile personal effects, positively identified by family members as belonging to their next of kin, found within the Pentagon?
Was this evidence placed beforehand? If so, by whom? If it was placed after the event why did nobody notice? Or, are the first responders (Pentagon employees) “in on it” too? How were personal effects taken from the victims (like a drivers license) without their knowledge beforehand and planted?

(9)How do you reconcile the bodies of passengers found within the Pentagon, some still strapped into their seats?
Were the bodies placed beforehand? If so, how do you explain the bodies in question checking in at the counter at the originating airport? Were the ticketing agents “in on it” too? If the pilots were killed beforehand and then placed in the Pentagon (at some point), who flew the plane? If the bodies were placed after the event, how were the correct passengers and crew killed, then placed in the Pentagon without anyone knowing? Are the first responders, who found the first bodies, “in on it” too? Can you offer a time line that reconciles the correct passengers/crew checking in at the airport, being led off and executed and then their bodies being transported to the crash site?

(10)How do you explain the impact zone damage being completely in-line with a fast moving commercial airliner?
Was it a controlled demolition? If so, where are the blasting caps? Wiring? How was the area wired without anyone noticing? How long would this take? How would the employees who were killed at their desks not notice demolition experts wiring their office with demolitions and not complain, notice, or ask questions? Or, were the employees killed at their desk “in on it” too? If there were no employees at their desks, were the bodies planted before the event? If so, how? By whom? How have the planters been kept quiet? Were the planters killed too? By whom? Were the bodies planted after the event? If so, by whom? Where are the eyewitness reports of dead employees being brought in, after the fact? Or, were/are these potential witnesses “in on it” too?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar
 


I think another thing to add to your list of questions is where are the witness statements from people in the other side of the Pentagon, if a plane did fly over at the same time as the impact why hasn't anyone there spoken up?

think of it this way, you're in your office minding your own business when all of a sudden there would be an almighty explosion nearby. Within that split second of hearing the explosion you would realise that you are not in immediate danger. So, what is the first thing you do? You would look out the window to see if you can see what made the explosion.

Obviously if an aircraft flew over at the same time you would spot it pretty easily.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Why are we entertaining such minutia arguments? If there was a fly-over, wouldn’t the evidence be quite obvious?


because the devil is in the details.


ever seen a nascar wipe out? THAT is what it looks like when metal is hurling about a hundreds of miles an hour. transfer of momentum DICTATES that if the (imaginary) plane was not slowed by the poles, than the poles took off at the speed of the plane after being struck.
the light poles were not moving at hundreds of miles per hour when they hit the lawn, or the taxi, and therefore, they were not hit by any 400+ mph plane, but were planted, and therefore it was a planned deception.

most of your other rhetoric is known as a "call for perfection".

for example:
you say someone found a chinese dollar bill.
i say, but there is no such thing as a chinese dollar bill.
you now demand to know what the person DID find, if NOT a chinese dollar bill, and if i can't tell you, then you have (in debunker logic) established that it must have been a chinese dollar bill.

i'm not going head to head on these 'details', because i've been around the treadmill too many times, already, but...

the phone calls were faked....
flight 77 was a mere red herring that disappeared into the wild blue yonder.
agents pretending to clean up, were actually planting debris...
some other debris was already covertly planted in the building, other stuff was planted through the "exit hole" in c-ring....

and as far as flight data recorders and DNA, trusting the guilty to not lie about those things is like asking the fox guarding the hen house if it ate the hens.
the DNA testing was done by the military, who are obviously complicit in the crime.

PROVE that the FDR was from flight 77.
PROVE that the military even did ONE SINGLE dna test.

what is it that bunkers, er, i mean, 'de'bunkers don't understand about the implications of an "INSIDE job"?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob



ever seen a nascar wipe out? THAT is what it looks like when metal is hurling about a hundreds of miles an hour. transfer of momentum DICTATES that if the (imaginary) plane was not slowed by the poles, than the poles took off at the speed of the plane after being struck.
the light poles were not moving at hundreds of miles per hour when they hit the lawn, or the taxi, and therefore, they were not hit by any 400+ mph plane, but were planted, and therefore it was a planned deception.





NASCAR SPECIFICATIONS:

Weight: 3,100 lb (1406 kg) Minimum (without driver); 3,300 lb (1497 kg) Minimum (with driver)

Speeds from 90 - over 200MPH.

757 Aircraft:

Weight: 255,000 lbs

Speed At Impact: 530 miles per hour


Do the Math





PROVE that the FDR was from flight 77.
PROVE that the military even did ONE SINGLE dna test.

what is it that bunkers, er, i mean, 'de'bunkers don't understand about the implications of an "INSIDE job"?


YOU don't understand... YOU are making the extrodianry claims WITHOUT evidence. CIT offers several witnesses but has FAILED to produce a flight path. WHY?

Buck up cowboys, the evidence to produce is on you! 7 years and you have all failed.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

the phone calls were faked....


What planet are you visiting from, billybob?


flight 77 was a mere red herring that disappeared into the wild blue yonder.


CIT claims that flying saucer sucked up AA77 as it flew over the Pentagon. AA77 has always been known as being a Boeing 757 but now you say it was a flying red herring.

That damn flying saucer must be some stinky by now.



...and as far as flight data recorders and DNA, trusting the guilty to not lie about those things is like asking the fox guarding the hen house if it ate the hens.


Usually, one has to be found guilty at a trial, but you've decided to dispense with the niceties, I see.

You can go back to your planet now.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Chadwickus
I think another thing to add to your list of questions is where are the witness statements from people in the other side of the Pentagon, if a plane did fly over at the same time as the impact why hasn't anyone there spoken up?

think of it this way, you're in your office minding your own business when all of a sudden there would be an almighty explosion nearby. Within that split second of hearing the explosion you would realise that you are not in immediate danger. So, what is the first thing you do? You would look out the window to see if you can see what made the explosion.

Obviously if an aircraft flew over at the same time you would spot it pretty easily.

There are not too many office buildings over there between the Pentagon and the Potomac River. There is a long island and freeways and bridges and a big marina. Most of it looks like Lady Bird Johnson Memorial Park. Then there is the river which is about 2000 feet wide.
Area Between Pentagon and Potomac
You have to realize that the residents and employees and travelers in the area are used to aircraft flying right over Columbia Island and up or down the Potomac River every few minutes seven days a week. There was nothing unusual about aircraft flying out of or into Reagan National Airport. They were used to the noise and sight of commercial aircraft climbing out of Reagan to cruising altitude or slowly flying in on a landing glide slope.



Also there were helicopters crossing quite often from DC to the Pentagon helipad. There was nothing unusual about seeing and hearing aircraft. Regardless, there might have been many people calling in to report a low flying aircraft, just after the explosion, to local law enforcement and the Arlington County 9-11 lines and the local FBI. It is likely the FBI contacted them and told them they were mistaken and informed them of what the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) exactly was, and never to bother them again. You don't think OUR FBI would do such a thing?

There were also likely many more people calling in to report the decoy aircraft crossing westward over the Potomac and circling over Alexandria and Fairfax and around Crystal City, getting lower and lower. Do you actually think Steve Chaconas was the only eyewitness who saw the decoy aircraft crossing the Potomac and banking around Reagan? OUR worthless mainstream media whores have not done much to seek these witnesses out, have they?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Yesireeee, I like the SPreston rendition of "the dog ate my homework!


One little minor problem with your theory regarding someone confusing your phantom "decoy" flyover departing the Pentagon at LOW ALTITUDE "like a bat out of hell" with a departure out of DCA is that National Ground Stop was in effect for civilian aircraft. I mean everyone realizes that most folks are not as smart as troofers, but I would venture to say the if anyone saw your "phantom decoy" they might figure out that it should not have been there.

But, how did we get this far. I mean, after all, you haven't shown that an aircraft could even get to that position. There is this nagging little problem with aerodynamics that YOU and CIT keep ignoring. That little aerodynamic problem involves just how an aircraft got to that position in the first place? Got any of those flight paths done yet or is this just more "bloated hot air"?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Also there were helicopters crossing quite often from DC to the Pentagon helipad. There was nothing unusual about seeing and hearing aircraft. Regardless, there might have been many people calling in to report a low flying aircraft, just after the explosion, to local law enforcement and the Arlington County 9-11 lines and the local FBI. It is likely the FBI contacted them and told them they were mistaken and informed them of what the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) exactly was, and never to bother them again. You don't think OUR FBI would do such a thing?

There were also likely many more people calling in to report the decoy aircraft crossing westward over the Potomac and circling over Alexandria and Fairfax and around Crystal City, getting lower and lower. Do you actually think Steve Chaconas was the only eyewitness who saw the decoy aircraft crossing the Potomac and banking around Reagan? OUR worthless mainstream media whores have not done much to seek these witnesses out, have they?


Anyone else see this pattern? (emphasis mine)

Pretty obvious to me.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
Simple common sense pretty much quashes any of these ridiculous theories, but they persist, I'm almost embarrased for them.

Why would the goverment knock over light poles at all? This adds what? "Look.. light poles got knocked over, that proves a plane was here!" Um.. no, I don't think so. Of course, I'm of the mind that the Pentagon wasn't needed at all. I think flying jets into the two World Trade Centers would do the trick, if I was trying to convince the American public that they represented a "terror threat." Why would you knock over a non-related building nearby? It served what purpose? None at all. And yet people keep coming up with ridiculous theories.

If I were a top-level official planning something, this wouldn't be it. To try to fly a plane at, and then just over, the Pentagon, and then hope no one saw it fly away. Can you picture it? "You don't think someone might notice it flying away!" "Um, no! The fireball will distract them, they'll never notice!" "Yea.. right.. next idea please!"

The premise is ridiculous, and the attempts to prove it didn't happen are almost laughable. No, I think people WOULD notice a low flying plane, that is nowhere where they are used to seeing planes. You folks are making all your assumptions based on some idea that people are complete morons. Too stupid to see a plane flying away (or apparently, hear it - must be one of those silent 757s!). Apparently those who watched it hit the Pentagon are blithering idiots, who don't know what a passenger jet looks like. They all completely imagined seeing something hit the Pentagon.


Instead of blindly clinging to the flight route, why not address some of the other glaring issues with your accusation?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

You have to realize that the residents and employees and travelers in the area are used to aircraft flying right over Columbia Island and up or down the Potomac River every few minutes seven days a week. There was nothing unusual about aircraft flying out of or into Reagan National Airport. They were used to the noise and sight of commercial aircraft climbing out of Reagan to cruising altitude or slowly flying in on a landing glide slope.


I love how you 9/11 Deniers claim to speak for everyone else. Too bad that you can't produce a flight path anywhere close to departure routes from Reagan. Even CIT refuses to do so.

But once again you evaded the point that you have no eyewitnesses to support your claims. And I've given you lots and lots of possibilities:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

How does it feel to be completely refuted by facts and evidence you never considered, SPreston?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   

jthomas
How does it feel to be completely refuted by facts and evidence you never considered, SPreston?

Picked up those tickets yet, so you can desperately search for any real living witnesses to the official Flight 77 south of the Navy Annex flight path? Good to see that at least one of you 'government loyalists' grew some cohones, or is your promised trip just another lie?


jthomas
OK, I'm booked for Washington for 5 days, at my own expense, arriving Thursday, Aug 28. The only thing that is unclear is what flight path the jet took.


jthomas
"I am a troll obsessed with people i think are nuts"



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 

The premise is ridiculous, and the attempts to prove it didn't happen are almost laughable. No, I think people WOULD notice a low flying plane, that is nowhere where they are used to seeing planes. You folks are making all your assumptions based on some idea that people are complete morons. Too stupid to see a plane flying away (or apparently, hear it - must be one of those silent 757s!). Apparently those who watched it hit the Pentagon are blithering idiots, who don't know what a passenger jet looks like. They all completely imagined seeing something hit the Pentagon.


Exactly.

A noisy, fast, low flying jet that attracts the attention of dozens of people on the west side of the Pentagon turns into a quiet, slow, normal jet on the east side of the Pentagon.

The conspirators even fooled the air traffic controller at Reagan National Airport who watched it approach while he was in the tower.

The truth movement is one Star Trek episode away from claiming ' Klingon cloaking technology'.



new topics

top topics



 
206
<< 48  49  50    52  53  54 >>

log in

join