Amazing Affidavit Submitted in New April Gallop Case Against Pentagon

Following are excerpts from a very concise, particularly hard-hitting affidavit submitted in the recently filed lawsuit by April Gallop. April was in the Pentagon along with her two month old son when the attack occurred on 9/11/01.

This was submitted by ROBIN D. HORDON, and the full PDF can be found here:

Robin Hordon PDF

I highly recommend reading the whole thing, as it contains much valuable information!

In addition, thee are many other affidavits filed in connection with this case here:

www.centerfor911justice.org...

And the full text of April's case can be found here:

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Thanks once again to Rob Balsamo and all at Pilots for 911 Truth for bringing this to our attention!

63. I conclude : a. that the loss of the target to the immediate west of the Pentagon is most likely due to the low altitudes between the Navy Annex and the Pentagon; b. that the reappeared target is most likely because this target climbed up and over the Pentagon thereby becoming visible to local radar systems; c. that the loss of the ground clutter in the vicinity of Georgetown at the projected location and time that an over-flying air vehicle would be in that exact geographical location indicates that the radar data was scrubbed or eliminated at that point to hide the fact that it was an over-flight.

64. The radar data made public stops shortly after the alleged crash at the Pentagon permitting no further analysis.

65. Also scrubbed from the radar data is any evidence of the E-4B flight captured by CNN.

FLIGHT DATA RECORDER OF AA11

66. There are questions concerning the reliability of the information provided to the public allegedly derived from the FDR [Flight Data Recorder] found at the Pentagon
Case 1:08-cv-10881-DC Document 17-4 Filed 06/29/2009 Page 13 of 17
14 that is said to belong to AA77.

67. The last modification to the data inside the FDR happened approximately four hours before it was found at the Pentagon which was many hours after the alleged crash of AA77 at the Pentagon. This is evidence that the FDR was tampered with at some point between the alleged crash time at the Pentagon and the recovery time established by the government.

68. There are no matching serial numbers establishing a history that the FDR recovered at the Pentagon was indeed the FDR that was onboard AA77 on 9/11/2001.

69. There is radar data and air traffic controller testimony that AA77 had begun a descent at the west end of its westbound leg just before it was lost to positive radar contact in eastern Ohio.

70. The FDR data does NOT show the beginning of this descent, further evidence of tampering.

71. The last heading noted by FAA air traffic controllers and FAA radar data establishes that AA77 was headed southwest bound and NOT eastbound before AA77 was lost to positive radar contact.

72. AA77 was captained by Chic Burlingame, who, approximately a year before 9/11 and while on National Guard duty, participated in the analysis of the defensive capabilities of the Pentagon should it be attacked by a hijacked airliner that would be used as an airborne bomb.

73. According to Burlingame’s family he would NEVER give up his aircraft to anyone attempting to take control of it, especially anyone wielding small box-cutter knives who was many inches shorter and tens of pounds lighter in physical stature.

As best I can tell, this and the other affidavits were filed as part of an Objection to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.

[edit on Fri Jul 17th 2009 by TrueAmerican]

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Following are excerpts from a very concise, particularly hard-hitting affidavit submitted in the recently filed lawsuit by April Gallop. April was in the Pentagon along with her two month old son when the attack occurred on 9/11/01.

Amazing is right - amazingly idiotic.

Is there nothing that states an affidavit needs to be accurate? Looking at this for a mere 30 seconds and at least one glaring error of idiocy jumps out. Chic Burlingame was a navy reserve officer, thus performing "naval reserve duty", not "National Guard duty", a distinction important in its accuracy.

Item 73 might indeed be a statement of fact, but it has absolutely no bearing on the events of 9/11 and reflects another level of idiocy with its inclusion.

Item, 68, talking about "no matching serial numbers", again invokes the idiot clause stating a fact that is so because of the secured aspect of the FBI investigation (something that is a fact whether or not the Troothers like it).

Is this the best the Troother legals Minds can come up with? This thing is rife with errors, both of fact and of issue. I can't wait to see it in front of a judge.

Originally posted by trebor451
Item, 68, talking about "no matching serial numbers", again invokes the idiot clause stating a fact that is so because of the secured aspect of the FBI investigation (something that is a fact whether or not the Troothers like it).

Oh, you mean secured aspect of the FBI coverup? :shk: You know what, give me some good reasons why the planes should not be identified conclusively, via matching serials numbers of the FDR's? The FBI withheld the serial numbers on the FDR's from the NTSB so that the planes could not be conclusively identified- plain and simple. Now why might that be? Maybe because those planes weren't the planes the official story alleges they were? Or maybe because they are afraid of what might turn up when the maintenance records are searched?

And btw, you still have another 70 line items to debunk. So far you are batting -100.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


The pseudoskeptics seem to have an intense dislike for former Air Traffic Controllers who speak up and tell the truth. Robin Dirk Hordon believes that NEADS was deliberately compromised by elements within the U.S. Military.

The 9-11 Whitewash Commission believes that high ranking officers within the US Military deliberately lied to them under oath and did nothing about it.

The US Congress believes that high ranking officers within the US Military deliberately lied to them under oath and did nothing about it.

Robin Hordon – Former FAA Air Traffic Controller at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, located in Nashua, NH, 1970 - 1981

Statement to this website 4/10/07: "I was an FAA Air Traffic Controller from 1970 - 1981. In 1981, I was one of 15,000 FAA air traffic controllers who went on strike and one of the 12,000 fired for going on strike, a strike that was primarily based on our complaints about safety and working conditions within the FAA, which are still seen today.

During my time as an Air Traffic Controller, I worked at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center in Nashua, NH, and I was certified in the air traffic sector where American Airlines Flight 11 became an "IN-FLIGHT-EMERGENCY" before being declared a "hijack" on 9/11.

In my 11-year FAA career, I worked in the development of "procedures and airspace design", including some military operations, and was part of the team which trained other Air Traffic Controllers and transitioned the FAA from its old broadband radar and simple flight data processors into the RDP (Radar Data Processing) and computerized radar displays.

I was a Facility Training Instructor and was certified to create transcripts from audio tapes, to interpret radar data in tracking aircraft from computer files, and to analyze computer tracking data, all of which would combine to "tell the story" of air traffic incidents. I was also the main creator of the Boston Center Profile Descent and Metering Program for Boston Logan airport.

patriotsquestion911.com...

I, Robin Dirk Hordon, declare, under the penalty of perjury:

1. I am a former Air Traffic Controller who worked at the Boston ARTCC [Air Route Traffic Control Center] located in Nashua, NH, and further, worked the specific airspace in which American Airlines flight Eleven [AA11] went off course and showed signs of an “in-flight emergency” before being considered a “hijacked aircraft” on September 11, 2001.
____________________________

4. As an Air Traffic Controller, Area Specialist and Facility Training Instructor, I was part of the team that upgraded the entire Air Traffic Control system into a computerized era installing and performing the upgrade training required for the use of the IBM9020 computer and its RDP [Radar Data Processing] computer programs. This enabled me to become familiar with both older analogue and modern digitized radar systems. I am familiar with how radar data is collected and how it is chosen or selected to be displayed at FAA air traffic control sectors in the ARTCC environment.

5. As an Air Traffic Controller, I have experienced the successful scrambling of military aviation assets in the assistance of an aircraft suffering an in-flight emergency. Additionally, I was peripherally involved in an aviation hijacking and directly involved in handling a US Air Carrier which reportedly had on board an altitude sensitive bomb as it transited through my airspace.

6. I have performed the duties required of me as part of the National Air Defense System working closely with Air Defense Command [the precedent organization to NORAD, the North American Air Dense system] in the operation of various War Games, low altitude Oil Burner Bombing Runs, aerial refueling, scramble and flush operations, and interceptor operations.

Robin Hordon PDF

31. In conclusion, I am convinced that the Air Defense System for the United States of America, as historically provided by NORAD and their northeast geographical sector known as NEADS, was deliberately compromised by elements within the U.S. Military by:

a. scheduling War Games Exercises which included “hijacking scenarios”so that, because of confusion, there would be a delay in appropriate reactions, including the usual and expected immediate scrambling protocols associated with “in-flight emergencies”.

b. radio transmissions that sounded like the voices of Arabic sounding people which have not been established as having come from the radios onboard the affected airliners and could have come from another airborne platform flying in the northeast airspace.

c. the failure of NEADS, which served as the communications nexus and SINGLE FACILITY responsible for all air defense activities in the northeast region of the U.S.A. on 9/11/2001, and was responsible for all the airspace in which all the flights, including the interceptors, finally scrambled, to take appropriate, timely and affirmative action to scramble interceptors when they were directly asked to do so by the FAA’s Boston ARTCC.

Robin Hordon PDF

[edit on 7/17/09 by SPreston]

Originally posted by SPreston
The pseudoskeptics seem to have an intense dislike for former Air Traffic Controllers who speak up and tell the truth. Robin Dirk Hordon believes that NEADS was deliberately compromised by elements within the U.S. Military.

Yes he does, and it's great that someone with his knowledge is able to give us the insight he has into all of this. And that's why I am really hoping more people go through it to see what he has to say. His credentials are of a very high and qualified capacity, so thanks for posting those. Quite compelling, and brings sheer terror to the trolls!

I mean if real justice is to be served, how can any court not at least initiate an inquiry into this information- or for that matter, any of the other affidavit info as well? I suppose since any of it was stricken from the foredrawn conclusions of the 9/11 Omission Report, and did not fit the official lie, it will therefore be tossed aside by the Justice assigned to deal with all the 9/11 cases.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
And the full text of April's case can be found here:

pilotsfor911truth.org...

Thanks once again to Rob Balsamo and all at Pilots for 911 Truth for bringing this to our attention!

Thanks to Cap'n Robby for debunking himself - again.

63. I conclude : a. that the loss of the target to the immediate west of the Pentagon is most likely due to the low altitudes between the Navy Annex and the Pentagon; b. that the reappeared target is most likely because this target climbed up and over the Pentagon thereby becoming visible to local radar systems; c. that the loss of the ground clutter in the vicinity of Georgetown at the projected location and time that an over-flying air vehicle would be in that exact geographical location indicates that the radar data was scrubbed or eliminated at that point to hide the fact that it was an over-flight.

And they found and scrubbed the minds of every one of the hundreds of unknown people in a position to see that "over-flight."

Wow! Far out, Cap'n Robby.

How long do you plan for this "over-flight" idiocy to keep fooling you, True American?

72. AA77 was captained by Chic Burlingame, who, approximately a year before 9/11 and while on National Guard duty, participated in the analysis of the defensive capabilities of the Pentagon should it be attacked by a hijacked airliner that would be used as an airborne bomb.

I can't believe I am posting in now the 4th thread dedicated to this frivolous lawsuit. Really? Old debunked ideas from 2006?? April has hired her some great attorney's this time huh?

The drill was not necessarily that of a hijacked plane. In fact, there is NOTHING that states the plane that crashes into the Pentagon was hijacked.

A major player in the exercise was the Arlington Fire Department.

"Our role is fire and rescue," Battalion Chief R.W. Cornwell said. "We get to see how each other operates and the roles and responsibilities of each. You have to plan for this. Look at all the air traffic around here."

www.dcmilitary.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Pentagon Contingency Planning

From the Washington Times:

The Oct. 24-26, 2000 Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, part of an annual emergency response rehearsal, envisioned a commercial airliner crashing into the Pentagon, killing 341 victims. The Pentagon is less than a mile from Reagan National Airport and is daily in the flight path of small commuter planes. Larger airliners generally fly to the east of the massive building over the Potomac River.

Hmm, now why is it that you Official Story loyalists are attacking the easy stuff here in this affidavit in a blatant attempt to discredit it? Come on people, let's get to the tough parts, like:

67. The last modification to the data inside the FDR happened approximately four hours before it was found at the Pentagon which was many hours after the alleged crash of AA77 at the Pentagon. This is evidence that the FDR was tampered with at some point between the alleged crash time at the Pentagon and the recovery time established by the government.

What do you have to say about THAT?

And why in the heck is the government still denying that the FDR's for F11 and 175 were recovered, when we have the testimony of the guy who drove the FBI to get them?

Sure looks like to me there is something on those FDR's they don't want anyone to see either. Or maybe they were so badly trashed and exposed in trying to falsify the FDR data from F77 that they learned their lesson? Where's the flight path recreation animation from these FDR's huh? The gubment needs better FDR data fakers.

And jthomas, the answer to your question is that I personally believe that given that so many people were glued to TV's on the news of a second plane hitting the towers, and thus inside, that it is quite possible and reasonable that flyover witnesses are going to be tough to come by. And the fact that CIT was able to dig up R. Roberts is an amazing feat in itself.

People in the area of the Pentagon in their cars were also wrapped up in this- either on the phone, or glued to their radios- so when all of a sudden there is an explosion and fireball, who in the heck is going to be looking for an overflight plane?

I also believe that given the way it was done, with initial shaped charges keeping the fireball away from the plane, that it is highly possible that plane was able to make it up and over, and then turn left as Roberts describes.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Hmm, now why is it that you Official Story loyalists are attacking the easy stuff here in this affidavit in a blatant attempt to discredit it?

That is the point T.A.! There shouldn't BE ANY "easy stuff." Several points were shown to you as false. It only took a matter of seconds to find this information on line.

What this proves, is the incompetence of her legal team and those that submitted affidavits. This pathetic attempt at a lawsuit will not see the light of day in any courtroom.

I can't believe I am posting in now the 4th thread dedicated to this frivolous lawsuit. Really? Old debunked ideas from 2006?? April has hired her some great attorney's this time huh?

I suppose that the world really does work like you say.

Do you know what a frivolous lawsuit is?

A baseless lawsuit that is filed with little or no prospect of success.

You call it baseless even though she already succeeded once, then you tried to debunk the success by saying it wasn't a "win".

Old debunked ideas from 2006 even though evidence since 2006 has been presented? Thats amazing, can I live In your universe? I want to be absolved of all intellectual responsibility also. And I hate integrity too, can't wait to be rid of that beast.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
67. The last modification to the data inside the FDR happened approximately four hours before it was found at the Pentagon which was many hours after the alleged crash of AA77 at the Pentagon. This is evidence that the FDR was tampered with at some point between the alleged crash time at the Pentagon and the recovery time established by the government.

What do you have to say about THAT?

I'd like to hear from a professional organization, perhaps the manufacturer of the FDR, rather than a proven bunch of lunatics with an agenda-driven analysis stemming from their severe case of Bush Derangement Syndrome.

To put it simply, I do not believe, trust, accept, value or care about anything the CIT/PfT crew have to say about this. Anything they say, print, post, publish, utter, whatever is so severely biased and tainted with their own agenda that the entire thing is a joke.

Originally posted by jprophet420


Do you know what a frivolous lawsuit is?

A baseless lawsuit that is filed with little or no prospect of success.

Yes, I do and thank you for showing others.

Do you know in the time you spent cutting and pasting from dictionary.com (or similar)the definition of frivolous, I was able to debunk 4 points in the affidavits?

You call it baseless even though she already succeeded once, then you tried to debunk the success by saying it wasn't a "win".

She agreed on a settlement. Deservedly so! She succeeded in being compensated for her and her son's injuries. However, there was no judgment in that suit that found anyone at fault.

Old debunked ideas from 2006 even though evidence since 2006 has been presented?

You're not really good at this T/A(edit) JP. #72 is not something that has been raised since 2006.

Thats amazing, can I live In your universe?

Reality is a universe that apparently you can't comprehend. Sorry you will have to...............

.... be absolved of all intellectual responsibility also. And I hate integrity too, can't wait to be rid of that beast.

Now, will you concede that there are errors on the affidavit?

I didn't think so.


EDIT:

I thought i was responding to TrueAmerican...

[edit on 18-7-2009 by CameronFox]

Originally posted by trebor451
I'd like to hear from a professional organization, perhaps the manufacturer of the FDR, rather than a proven bunch of lunatics with an agenda-driven analysis stemming from their severe case of Bush Derangement Syndrome.

To put it simply, I do not believe, trust, accept, value or care about anything the CIT/PfT crew have to say about this. Anything they say, print, post, publish, utter, whatever is so severely biased and tainted with their own agenda that the entire thing is a joke.

Trebor,

PFFT started this back in 2007. Aiden from 911blogger also did an FOI request back in 2008 and received a file.

www.911blogger.com...

PFFT actually admitted that a debunker from Italy showed a different time stamp than the one that was obtained from PFFT.

z9.invisionfree.com...



None the less, anyone can alter the "date modified" on any file.


John Farmer. (AKA: 911Files here at ATS) Should be able to shed some light on this. I will U2U him and ask him to chime in.

reply to post by CameronFox


If you debunked anything it wasn't in this thread.

I will point out that you used character assassination again. I will also point out you have never debunked or derailed one of my threads.

Please quote what you have debunked.

Originally posted by jprophet420

If you debunked anything it wasn't in this thread.

The possibility of you having reading comprehension issues is shown here.
Read #72 again. Then read my response to it.

I will point out that you used character assassination again. I will also point out you have never debunked or derailed one of my threads.

okay?

Please quote what you have debunked.

Please respond to #72 of the affidavit, then I will show you 3 other points that will be laughed at in any court. Deal? You see, we will do this one at a time so you can understand.

72. AA77 was captained by Chic Burlingame, who, approximately a year before 9/11 and while on National Guard duty, participated in the analysis of the defensive capabilities of the Pentagon should it be attacked by a hijacked airliner that would be used as an airborne bomb.

The Pentagon Mass Casualty project (codenamed Pentagon Mascal) was a mock terrorist contingency exercise that was held in the Office of the Secretary of Defense conference room between October 24 and October 26, 2000.

The Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, as the crash was called, was just one of several scenarios that emergency response teams were exposed to Oct. 24-26 in the Office of the Secretaries of Defense conference room. On Oct. 24, there was a mock terrorist incident at the Pentagon Metro stop and a construction accident to name just some of the scenarios that were practiced to better prepare local agencies for real incidents.

One of several, including mock terrorist contingency.

"Our role is fire and rescue," Battalion Chief R.W. Cornwell said. "We get to see how each other operates and the roles and responsibilities of each. You have to plan for this. Look at all the air traffic around here."

Note he says "our role". Notice there was more than one scenario. You have debunked nothing.

Originally posted by CameronFox
Trebor,

PFFT started this back in 2007. Aiden from 911blogger also did an FOI request back in 2008 and received a file.

www.911blogger.com...

PFFT actually admitted that a debunker from Italy showed a different time stamp than the one that was obtained from PFFT.

A good segue into a re-iteration of my comment - I will not trust any PFT, any Italian, Pole, Swazilander or Tasmanian or whomever, John Farmer included, with whatever results the came up with from their tinkering on an item such as a digital FDR that was in a 500-knot impact with a concrete wall. The PFT moros like to talk about "chain of custody" all the time - whatever data they have has an absolute cluster-**** of a chain of custody from their own mental meandering.

Again, I wouldn't trust PFT if they said "Good morning". It all boils down to credibility. They have zero.


[edit on 18-7-2009 by trebor451]

Originally posted by jprophet420

72. AA77 was captained by Chic Burlingame, who, approximately a year before 9/11 and while on National Guard duty, participated in the analysis of the defensive capabilities of the Pentagon should it be attacked by a hijacked airliner that would be used as an airborne bomb.

Okay, so there is the quote. Good job!

The Pentagon Mass Casualty project (codenamed Pentagon Mascal) was a mock terrorist contingency exercise that was held in the Office of the Secretary of Defense conference room between October 24 and October 26, 2000.

Where is the source for this?

Here JP:

Contingency planning Pentagon MASCAL exercise
simulates scenarios in preparing for emergencies


by Dennis Ryan
Pentagram staff writer

The fire and smoke from the downed passenger aircraft billows from the Pentagon courtyard. Defense Protective Services Police seal the crash sight. Army medics, nurses and doctors scramble to organize aid. An Arlington Fire Department chief dispatches his equipment to the affected areas.

Don Abbott, of Command Emergency Response Training, walks over to the Pentagon and extinguishes the flames. The Pentagon was a model and the "plane crash" was a simulated one.

The Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, as the crash was called, was just one of several scenarios that emergency response teams were exposed to Oct. 24-26 in the Office of the Secretaries of Defense conference room.

Read the article from DC Military.com. NOWHERE does it state that the crash was from a hijacked airliner!

Originally posted by jprophet420 One of several, including mock terrorist contingency.

Did you notice in the article the terrorist attack was in the Metro station??? It had NOTHING to do with the airplane crash. I was a separate attack.

Note he says "our role". Notice there was more than one scenario. You have debunked nothing.

Really? Are you doing this on purpose? Are you suggesting that the FD was in on it?? Please thrill me with an explanation.




Edit to add:

Major Lorie A. Brown, Chief Nurse of DiLorenzo TRICARE Health Clinic

Having practiced over the past year our roles and worked our pieces, we knew our lanes of responsibility. I’m the chairperson for the DiLorenzo Action Response Team, DART; that is our MASCAL plan. For the past year, the DART team has been working on developing that plan, really creating a whole new plan. We sat down and met on numerous occasions with the Air Force clinic, civilian EMS, (Emergency Medical Services) Pentagon and DoD hierarchy, DPS and with the other civilian medical agencies. We worked through issues, what would happen in the event of a MASCAL, what each of our roles would be. We participated in several large tabletop exercises with these external bodies, to include FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) and the others I just mentioned. We even did our own internal exercise where we made up the scenario of a plane crashing into the building. Though you can never be prepared for an event like this, I am sure all our preparations and exercise paid off.

history.amedd.army.mil...

Keep in mind how close the airport is to the Pentagon.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by CameronFox]

Originally posted by trebor451
The PFT morons like to talk about "chain of custody" all the time - whatever data they have has an absolute cluster-**** of a chain of custody from their own mental meandering.

Again, I wouldn't trust PFT if they said "Good morning". It all boils down to credibility. They have zero.

I couldn't have said it better myself. PFFT's affidavit I would assume is getting many chuckles from the attorneys that are reading it.

Even the quotes you just used, some of which are the same as mine, state there were multiple scenarios. You post nothing that says there was no scenario involving a hijacked plane.

What do you mean "in on it"?. Theres nothing to be "in on". They participated in one of multiple scenarios. That was their role.

[edit on 18-7-2009 by jprophet420]