SKEPTICS: Do you have any witnesses...

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

SKEPTICS: Do you have any witnesses...; ...to the NTSB/RADES data loop?
Topic Started: Mar 24 2008, 01:37 PM (357 Views)
Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 24 2008, 01:37 PM Post #1
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	Clearly we have provided abundant supporting evidence, including EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS, showing the plane approached from over DC skies crossing over the Potomac river. The real question is can skeptics provide eyewitnesses who saw the plane make this big loop, SW of the pentagon and WH over Alexandria and Springfield?
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


Bret08	Mar 24 2008, 01:47 PM Post #2
repeated trolling offender Posts: 209 Group: BANNED! Member #227 Joined: 01/27/08	There are plenty of witnesses who saw the plane go into the pentagon, including noc witnesses. You can not account for what they saw. You make up the flyover theory, but can't support it with facts. No evidence. No witnesses. All you are doing is finding tiny anomalies and harping on them. All physical and witness evidence conclusively support the fact that AA77 crashed into the pentagon. I think it is time to give this one up. All noc witnesses are wrong about noc, evidence says so.



Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 24 2008, 01:52 PM Post #3
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	Bret08 Mar 24 2008, 01:47 PM There are plenty of witnesses who saw the plane go into the pentagon, including noc witnesses. You can not account for what they saw. You make up the flyover theory, but can't support it with facts. No evidence. No witnesses. All you are doing is finding tiny anomalies and harping on them. All physical and witness evidence conclusively support the fact that AA77 crashed into the pentagon. I think it is time to give this one up. All noc witnesses are wrong about noc, evidence says so. Bret, I know you want to keep saying this out loud to yourself in order that you convince yourself that the NOC path just isn't true. But please stick to the OP and don't hijack my threads. Reported.
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


Sureshot	Mar 24 2008, 02:18 PM Post #4
Your glorious Loose Change Forum dictator... Posts: 415 Group: Admins Member #1 Joined: 12/21/07	Keep it on topic and keep it civil.



SPreston	Mar 24 2008, 03:46 PM Post #5
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	Brett05 There are plenty of witnesses who saw the plane go into the pentagon, including noc witnesses. You can not account for what they saw. You make up the flyover theory, but can't support it with facts. No evidence. No witnesses. All you are doing is finding tiny anomalies and harping on them. All physical and witness evidence conclusively support the fact that AA77 crashed into the pentagon. I think it is time to give this one up. All noc witnesses are wrong about noc, evidence says so. Go on back over to the JREF forum where real evidence and real witnesses are not considered important at all, as opposed to your heresay evidence and mainstream media BS. We don't need your kind here hijacking threads and pushing disinformation. Fact is lots of witnesses spotted the decoy aircraft over Washington DC and southeast of Washington DC and east of the Potomac and crossing west across the Potomac and banking around Reagan National, and not one spotted the alleged official Flight 77 in a big loop over Alexandria and Springfield and west of the Potomac. according to the fake RADES data. And fact is lots of witnesses spotted the C-130 over Washington DC and not one spotted the C-130 south of Reagan on a straight 15 mile long path southwest according to the fake RADES data, apparently headed for Arkansas instead of Minnesota. RADES data C-130 flight path and actual decoy aircraft flight path and Chaconas position on the river 4.5 miles from Pentagon Actual C-130 flight path (Yellow line) - Faked RADES C-130 flight path in blue - Actual decoy aircraft spotted by O'Brien after C-130 passed the Mall



PBnJ	Mar 24 2008, 04:01 PM Post #6
The Best Sandwich on Earth Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #315 Joined: 02/13/08	I take it you're throwing out Danielle O'Brien's statement? Or does watching it on radar at the time not count?



Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 24 2008, 04:16 PM Post #7
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	PBnJ Mar 24 2008, 04:01 PM I take it you're throwing out Danielle O'Brien's statement? Or does watching it on radar at the time not count? She supports the DC flight path. Sorry. Didn't you see the other thread? Quote: O'Brien went to the Pentagon to see what happened for herself, making her ever more certain that the Pentagon was a secondary target, and that the hijackers overshot or missed the White House. "I've been down to the Pentagon and stood on the hillside and imagined where, according to what I saw on the radar, that flight would have come from," she says. "And I think that they came eastbound and because sun was in their eyes that morning, and because the White House was beyond a grove of trees, I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them. You can't miss the Pentagon. It's so telltale by its shape and its size, and they said, 'Look, there it is. Take that. Get that.' They certainly could have had the White House if they had seen it." http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=124266&page=3 or http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=123822&page=1 Edited by Aldo Marquis CIT, Mar 24 2008, 04:18 PM.
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


PBnJ	Mar 24 2008, 04:28 PM Post #8
The Best Sandwich on Earth Posts: 179 Group: Members Member #315 Joined: 02/13/08	Here I can red-bold what I think is important too! Quote: (...) I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them. (...) It did indeed miss the whitehouse. Have fun, Aldo.



Domenick DiMaggio	Mar 24 2008, 04:39 PM Post #9
Posts: 2,002 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	Bret08 Mar 24 2008, 01:47 PM There are plenty of witnesses who saw the plane go into the pentagon, including noc witnesses. You can not account for what they saw. You make up the flyover theory, but can't support it with facts. No evidence. No witnesses. All you are doing is finding tiny anomalies and harping on them. All physical and witness evidence conclusively support the fact that AA77 crashed into the pentagon. I think it is time to give this one up. All noc witnesses are wrong about noc, evidence says so. So that's a JREF way of answering "No". it doesn't matter if we have witnesses or not, we have the Bush Administration and the Media on our side. Your witnesses are wrong. Our non-witnesses who didn't see anything are right.
Posts: 2,002 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 24 2008, 04:56 PM Post #10
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	PBnJ Mar 24 2008, 04:28 PM Here I can red-bold what I think is important too! Quote: (...) I think they couldn't see it. It was too fast. They came over that Pentagon or saw it just in front of them. (...) It did indeed miss the whitehouse. Have fun, Aldo. Don't get mad PBnJ. It is clear that she is NOT describing the official flight path. "just in front of them" would be our flight path. Especially overshooting the White House. Sorry. Let me ask you, do these comments fit better with our flight path or the official story flight path? Edited by Aldo Marquis CIT, Mar 24 2008, 04:58 PM.
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


Boonedoggled	Mar 24 2008, 05:22 PM Post #11
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08	Aldo SKEPTICS: Do you have any witnesses...; ...to the NTSB/RADES data loop? Yes. Chris Stephenson. Quote: He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said.
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08


Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 24 2008, 08:22 PM Post #12
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	Boonedoggled Mar 24 2008, 05:22 PM Aldo SKEPTICS: Do you have any witnesses...; ...to the NTSB/RADES data loop? Yes. Chris Stephenson. Quote: He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said. No sorry. That is in NO WAY definitive. In fact Stephenson's account supports the DC path as it would cross right in front of him, as opposed to the official path which is behind him and farther out. Again, that is in no way definitive. If he said he saw it do this SW or W of him over Alexandria and Springfield, you would have something. Sorry, try again.
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


JackD	Mar 24 2008, 10:02 PM Post #13
Posts: 262 Group: Members Member #253 Joined: 01/31/08	it is unclear what was the source of the radar blip (no transponder) which Danielle O'brien (ATC, Dulles) was tracking. possible sources: commercial jet (least likely, given speed and trajectory) fighter jet (better fit, but also no transponder - and never identified -- USAF or??? -- this fits better with Arnold's explanation from AirWarOverAmerica book) synthetic "inject" blip -- as per Vigilant Warrior, Amalgam Warrior, Amalgam virgo, Vigilant Guardian exercises taking place all across North American Airspace -- there are multiple software/hardware tools for generating false blips. false radar blips were being inserted into radars on 9/11/01 - that is a matter of public record. it's up to you to decide which is possible, or likely, sources of the radar blip tracked by o'brien -- the one she thought moved like a fighter jet.
Posts: 262 Group: Members Member #253 Joined: 01/31/08


Boonedoggled	Mar 24 2008, 10:18 PM Post #14
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08	Aldo Sorry, try again. If I must. Quote: About 9:30, the phone that connects his tower to the Secret Service rang. A voice on the other end said an unidentified aircraft was speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looked at the radarscope and saw that the jet was about five miles to the west. The airplane was completely out of place. "I knew what had just happened in New York. I had a pretty good idea what was up," he said. He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said. Source
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08


Boonedoggled	Mar 24 2008, 10:33 PM Post #15
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08	JackD commercial jet (least likely, given speed and trajectory) fighter jet (better fit, but also no transponder - and never identified -- USAF or??? -- this fits better with Arnold's explanation from AirWarOverAmerica book) Except for the fact that Chris Stephenson looked out the window of Reagan Tower and witnessed the aircraft. Quote: synthetic "inject" blip -- as per Vigilant Warrior, Amalgam Warrior, Amalgam virgo, Vigilant Guardian exercises taking place all across North American Airspace -- there are multiple software/hardware tools for generating false blips. false radar blips were being inserted into radars on 9/11/01 - that is a matter of public record. NORAD can insert false blips on their radar screens for training purposes, but Danielle O'Brien was not looking at a NORAD radar screen. Can you provide any accounts of FAA controllers witnessing false blips on 9/11 or any time ever?
Posts: 228 Group: Members Member #51 Joined: 01/15/08


SPreston	Mar 24 2008, 11:09 PM Post #16
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	Boonedoggled Mar 24 2008, 05:22 PM Aldo SKEPTICS: Do you have any witnesses...; ...to the NTSB/RADES data loop? Yes. Chris Stephenson. Quote: He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said. That doesn't quite work too well does it? NORAD and Air Traffic Controllers were in a frenzy because of the decoy aircraft which flew over Washington DC and was at 09:35:41 six miles southeast of the White House. Stevenson was shutting down flights and Reagan National was in the middle of a complete evacuation and the ATC tower was in a complete turmoil. We found out that Chris Stephenson was apparently adjusting the official story and apparently didn't actually see either the official flight 77 or the decoy aircraft flyover or the C-130 which was supposed to be shadowing Flight 77 or America West N644AW landing 2 minutes after the explosions (actually while they were still rising hundreds of feet into the air) were catching Stephenson by surprise. Stephenson already had his hands full handling emergency after emergency and didn't have time to be gazing wistfully off into the northwest did he? That decoy aircraft with its transponder likely turned off which Steve Chaconas saw right before him banking around Reagon National from the east, and disappearing behind the hills and city buildings to the northwest, and was unknown to the ATC tower was already gone up the Potomac or perhaps quickly landing as America West N644AW with its transponder suddenly turned back on, by the time Stephenson jerked his head around in surprise at the towering explosion and smoke suddenly to the northwest. Later Stephenson was probably adjusting the official story wasn't he? Woody Box I think we have to take Stephenson's account as an adjustment to the official story. I don't want to denounce him for that, but look at that: At 0939 HRS the National Airport control tower transmitted, “Crash! Crash! Crash!” over the MWAA frequency and activated an airport alert, but there was confusion about the exact location of the crash. http://info.jems.com/911/pdf/jems0402.pdf The "confusion about the exact location" refers to the fact that the tower first reported a crash "near the 14th street bridge" or "at the end of Reagan airport". Forgive me that I don't dig out the sources for now (I will if you demand it), but from your article one might get the impression that the tower controllers actually watched the plane exploding in the Pentagon. This was certainly not the case. NORAD tapes 09:34:01 WASHINGTON CENTER: Now, let me tell you this. I—I'll—we've been looking. We're—also lost American 77— WATSON: American 77? DOOLEY: American 77's lost— WATSON: Where was it proposed to head, sir? WASHINGTON CENTER: Okay, he was going to L.A. also— WATSON: From where, sir? WASHINGTON CENTER: I think he was from Boston also. Now let me tell you this story here. Indianapolis Center was working this guy— WATSON: What guy? WASHINGTON CENTER: American 77, at flight level 3-5-0 [35,000 feet]. However, they lost radar with him. They lost contact with him. They lost everything. And they don't have any idea where he is or what happened. Don't forget that NORAD Commander Major General Arnold testified before Congress that he and his staff were above Washington circling, ("in fact my own staff, we were orbiting now over Washington, D.C. by this time" here) most likely in the E4-B National Airborne Operations Center. Quote: This is a full 10 minutes later than the time Major General Arnold and Colonel Scott would give in their testimony; reality was a lot messier. 09:35:41 ROUNTREE: Huntress [call sign for neads] ID, Rountree, can I help you? BOSTON CENTER (Scoggins): Latest report, [low-flying] aircraft six miles southeast of the White House. ROUNTREE: Six miles southeast of the White House? BOSTON CENTER (Scoggins): Yup. East—he's moving away? ROUNTREE: Southeast from the White House. BOSTON CENTER (Scoggins): Air—aircraft is moving away. ROUNTREE: Moving away from the White House? BOSTON CENTER (Scoggins): Yeah.… ROUNTREE: Deviating away. You don't have a type aircraft, you don't know who he is— BOSTON CENTER (Scoggins): Nothing, nothing. We're over here in Boston so I have no clue. That—hopefully somebody in Washington would have better—information for you. This will turn out to be American 77, but since the hijackers turned the beacon off on this plane as well, no one will realize that until later. Depending on how you count, neads now has three reported possible hijackings from Boston (the phantom American 11 and two unidentified planes) as well as Washington Center's report that American 77 is lost. Of these four vague and ultimately overlapping reports, the latest—word of a plane six miles from the White House—is the most urgent. The news sets off a frenzy. 09:36:23 NASYPANY: O.K., Foxy [Major Fox, the Weapons Team head]. I got a aircraft six miles east of the White House! Get your fighters there as soon as possible! MALE VOICE: That came from Boston? HUCKABONE: We're gonna turn and burn it—crank it up— MALE TECH: Six miles! HUCKABONE: All right, here we go. This is what we're gonna do— NASYPANY: We've got an aircraft deviating eight [sic] miles east of the White House right now. FOX: Do you want us to declare A.F.I.O. [emergency military control of the fighters] and run 'em straight in there? NASYPANY: Take 'em and run 'em to the White House. FOX: Go directly to Washington. CITINO: We're going direct D.C. with my guys [Langley fighters]? Okay. Okay. HUCKABONE: Ma'am, we are going A.F.I.O. right now with Quit 2-5 [the Langley fighters]. They are going direct Washington. NAVY A.T.C.: Quit 2-5, we're handing 'em off to Center right now. HUCKABONE: Ma'am, we need to expedite that right now. We've gotta contact them on 2-3-4-6. http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608?currentPage=7 NORAD Tapes "Six miles south, or west, or east of the White House is—it's seconds [away]," Nasypany told me later. "Airliners traveling at 400-plus knots, it's nothing. It's seconds away from that location." The White House, then, is in immediate danger. Radar analysis in the following weeks will show that the plane abruptly veers away and turns toward the Pentagon, though the controllers at neads have no way of knowing this in the moment. Looking in the general capital area, one of the tracker techs thinks he spots the plane on radar, then just as quickly loses it. 09:37:56 MALE TECH: Right here, right here, right here. I got him. I got him. NASYPANY: We just lost track. Get a Z-point [coordinate] on that.… O.K., we got guys lookin' at 'em. Hold on.… Where's Langley at? Where are the fighters? http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2006/08/norad200608?currentPage=8 Six miles southeast of the White House at the NORAD 1st report time of 09:35:41 would place the decoy aircraft about where the aircraft symbol is nearest to Andrews AFB is on the satellite map. The remainder of the flight path drawn on the map as witnessed by Steve Chaconas is about 12.5 miles to the pull up at the Pentagon at an alleged 9:37:44 (previously 9:43 before changed because of stupid errors in disinformation). This would leave 2 minute 3 seconds for the decoy aircraft to arrive at the Pentagon. Dividing 12.5 miles by 123 seconds would give an average 757 aircraft speed of .101 mps or 365.853 mph. Now let's add the 5 minutes 16 seconds of the original 9:43 explosion time to the formula. Dividing 12.5 miles by 439 seconds would give an average aircraft speed of .0284 mps or 102.505 mph. Much too slow, but the aircraft had already proceeded past its reported location by the time NORAD received the Boston Center 9:35:41 report. In 30 seconds time, the aircraft would have traveled between 3.03 and .852 miles along the flight path. The aircraft speed would be between 365.853 mph and 102.505 mph assuming the orginal 9:43 time of impact. Therefore this decoy aircraft actually pulling up at the Pentagon at 9:43 could have been very near the recommended 757 landing speed of 152.236 mph (here and here) and could have easily landed at the end of the long runway from the north by engaging full flaps, dropping the gear and pulling a sharp right turn which these aircraft are easily capable of at slow speeds. Of course the landing time would be later than the 9:39 N644AW time, but since the PRIMARY SUSPECT is manipulating official times to fit their faulty disinformation and magician's tricks, they likely would not hesitate to alter the landing time of N644AW to hide their trickery and also order a Federal employee Stephenson (Dulles and Reagan National are both owned by the Federal government) to adjust the official story. Quote: Stephenson and the others stood in stunned silence for several seconds. But then the phones started ringing again and they got back to shutting the airport down. Revised for corrections Edited by SPreston, Mar 26 2008, 09:20 AM.



Aldo Marquis CIT	Mar 25 2008, 09:50 AM Post #17
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08	Boonedoggled Mar 24 2008, 10:18 PM Aldo Sorry, try again. If I must. Quote: About 9:30, the phone that connects his tower to the Secret Service rang. A voice on the other end said an unidentified aircraft was speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looked at the radarscope and saw that the jet was about five miles to the west. The airplane was completely out of place. "I knew what had just happened in New York. I had a pretty good idea what was up," he said. He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said. Source Yes nice try. But again not definitive. Not his own words. And from USA Today so we should already be suspect of how the author may have chose to word it. When I say not definitive, I mean, of course it was "five miles to the west"... BEFORE it reached Washington and did the turn! In other words it still works with our flight path, Boone. Sorry.
Posts: 1,649 Group: Members Member #13 Joined: 01/14/08


SPreston	Mar 25 2008, 10:27 AM Post #18
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	"about 9:30 ... the jet was about five miles to the west" fits just fine and even the timing seems about right for the decoy aircraft to be 6 miles southeast of the White House at 09:35:41 according to the NORAD Tapes. However the last part .... Quote: He looked out the tower window and saw the jet turning to the right and descending. The jet did a full circle and whoever was flying knew what he was doing. The wings never rocked or oscillated, Stephenson said. ... just does not fit because according to the NORAD tapes and Steve Chaconas, the decoy aircraft had to fly over Washington and turn to a point 6 miles southeast of the White House near Andrews AFB and continue across the Potomac right in front of Chaconas and continue banking around Reagan National until it disappeared behind the hills and tall buildings to the northwest. This is not what Stephenson is describing. He is not describing an aircraft circling around him as actually happened. Stephenson is describing the flight path of the fraudulent Flight 77 FDR and RADES data to the southwest. This was likely Stephenson adjusting the official story. The adjusted official flight path Rades data C-130 flight path and actual decoy aircraft flight path and Chaconas position on the river 4.5 miles from Pentagon Actual C-130 flight path (Yellow line) - Faked RADES C-130 flight path in blue and official Flight 77 in red - Actual decoy aircraft spotted by O'Brien after C-130 passed the Mall Edited by SPreston, Mar 25 2008, 11:06 AM.



1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


« Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic »