Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
How many witnesses claim they SAW light poles...; get hit by a plane?
Topic Started: Jan 31 2008, 12:52 PM (9,401 Views)
JackD

wrong.

Here is the data laid out:

1) explosions with shock waves, smelling of cordite, register at multiple locations inside Pentagon rings E, D, and C. Testified to by April Gallop who was at her desk at E Ring.
Damage and death significant in C ring, farthest from E facade

2) a flying object, described as commuter jet, passenger jet, other, seen by many eyewitnesses, flying low and fast in vicinity of Pentagon.

3) a blinding explosion, silvery fireball, near floor 1 and 2, at Pentagon facade E ring, close to corridor 10/
and ensuing black inky smoke from trailer obscures site

4) many personnel on ground, especiall Naval Command Center and Defense Intel Agency, killed.

5) flying object last sighted moments before fireball. widely assumed that fireball was result of plane crash, particularly in light of WTC 1& 2 events, already broadcast.

add it up:
was the cause of all damage to Pentagon, and deaths, property destruction, traceable to a hijackd plane impact?
if so, where is the plane identification?

if there is any anomalous damage at Pentagon, C ring 'breach hole', B ring deaths (see washpost) etc, or as April Gallop testifies, lack of jet fuel inside exploded office -- if there is even one aspect of crash that cannot be explained by a single-plane-acting-alone, then the investigation MUST expland to include other possibilities.

this does NOT rule out a plane crash, it merely establishes that there was more going on in crime than just the plane.

analogy, oswald & kennedy assasination.

could oswald have fired all the shots seen & heard from all parts of Dealey plaza?
no.

does that mean oswald was not involved?
no.
what does it mean? any investigation of JFK assasination must consider the physical aspects of damage that could NOT be produced solely by oswald and his mannlicher carcano.

which establishes a prima facia case for "inside job" -- and in our case, AA77/hanihanjour == Oswald.

did AA77/HaniHanjour piloting "act alone?"

highly highly improbable.

consider the limits of logic
does this prove there was flyover? no.
does this prove there was impact? no
does this imply there has been a concerted coverup? Yes.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
22205
Member Avatar
Arlingtonian


Quote:
 
D.S. Khavkin: "First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles."


gravey's link:
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm
http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/mirror/witness_d-s-khavkin.htm (dead link)
http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0082_b_They%20saw%20the%20aircraft.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/1540586.stm (wokring link, original source)


quote from original source:
Quote:
 
We live in Arlington, VA just outside of Washington, DC in a high-rise building on the eight floor. Our balcony faces the city, with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC. We were watching the events unfolding on TV in New York. Then, at about 9:40 am Eastern Daylight Time, my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead. At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle.

First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side the Pentagon.


ok so khavkin (allegedly) saw and distincly distinguishes "a SMALL AIRCRAFT" from the usual "JETS that sometimes fly overhead". does that sound like flight 77 (a 757) to you? and again i have to wonder why the BBC in england is printing this account, instead of a local DC paper. to be specific, this account (from khavkin) comes from an EMAIL to the BBC. real official huh? the BBC preface this "account" (and the others on that page) with this:

Quote:
 
Thank you for your e-mails. This Talking Point is now closed. A selection of your eye-witness accounts is published below


so once again we have a static account, basically another set of words printed and finding its way in what skeptics would like to call FACT, but there is absolutely no corroboration of this account, NONE. just some guy (could be anyone) who allegedly sent an email to the BBC of all places, instead of posting it locally, WHERE it could be scrutinized and examined by those familiar with the location.

note also that the BBC "selected" which tales to publish. who knows which accounts were omitted and why? either way, anyone could have emailed them their "story". you or i (had we beat the "deadline") could have included our own version and guess what? as long as it in some way supported the OFFICIAL story, it probably would have been printed and then counted on as FACT (by skeptics).




here is a list of KHAVKINS in all of virginia (all results happen to be in arlington,va):
http://www.zabasearch.com/query1_zaba.php?sname=KHAVKIN&state=VA&ref=&se=&doby=&city=&name_style=1&tm=


NOTE: not one of those addresses puts you in a position to have seen the plane hit the light poles (all addresses are apartment buildings, YET they are west of and lower than the sheraton):

http://www.google.com/lochp?hl=en&tab=wl&q=2802%209TH%20ST%20S+ARLINGTON+VA+22204
(is a 3 story apartment building)

http://www.google.com/lochp?hl=en&tab=wl&q=2005%20COLUMBIA%20PIKE+ARLINGTON+VA+22204
(is a gardenstyle apartment building, no higher than 6 stories)

http://www.google.com/lochp?hl=en&tab=wl&q=2001%20COLUMBIA%20PIKE+ARLINGTON+VA+22204
(known as dorchester towers, no higher than 8 stories)

http://www.everyaptmapped.com/apartments/arlington,virginia,va/dorchester+towers.html (2001 col. pike)
(dorchester towers link)

picture of the columbia pike side of Dorchester Towers (note i count 7 floors above ground level, with one possibly basement level, that makes 8 - per khavkin's claim in her alleged account):
Posted Image


white pages/google put her at 2001 columbia pike:
http://www.whitepages.com/10866/search/FindPerson?firstname=&name=khavkin&where=virginia
http://www.google.com/search?q=(703)+521-3847&hl=en&pb=r&sa=X&oi=rwp&ct=title

Deborah Khavkin
2001 Columbia Pike, Apt 8XX
Arlington, VA 22204-4556
(703) xxx-xxxx


she lives (or lived) on the 8th floor - which fits khavkin's account. plus - only on the top floor of an apartment building would the sound and the roar/vibrations of a large jet be most evident and most felt (especially on approach from the west). if she was lower than the top floor, she would be shielded from the sound by neighboring apartments ON TOP of hers. we know she wasnt on the west side of the building, or she would have ZERO view of the event, so she had to be on the east side, which faces the sheraton and the pentagon. so she was definitely shielded to some extent by sound from BEHIND (west of her) apartment due to other apartments, which means her reaction to the event would be delayed somewhat. this suggests that by the time she got to her window she was watching the plane making its way PAST overhead and somewhere between her and the SHERATON. but after the sheraton, she could NOT see what became of the event. this is a FACT.

some relevant geographic visuals, you can get the best views of these areas/buildings by using these maps (and clicking on BIRDs EYE VIEW):


Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


Posted Image

Posted Image

khavkin may have had a view of DC (the washington monument to be specific because it is north of the pentagon), but not of the side of the pentagon that was hit and especially NOT of the light poles.

but just to be sure, i went by the apartment building at 2001 columbia pike tonight (2005 is too short in height to even be looked into), and yes, beyond any doubt, i guarantee you can NOT see the pentagon from that location. the sheraton is in your way, and even if it wasnt, you could NOT see down in to the bowl where the pentagon is.



***



an update about khavkin's (alleged) location: the building is divided into 3 addresses:
Posted Image


so there is only one apartment on the eighth floor of 2001 columbia pike facing east towards the pentagon:
Posted Image


but its view is definitely blocked by the sheraton:
Posted Image


even without the sheraton in the way, the pentagon and route 27 are out of view due to their lower elevation. without the sheraton in the way, the 8th floor apartment would at best be able to see the row of navy annex buildings, and the horizon.


so khavkin could NOT have seen what is attributed to her.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
streetcar304

22205
Aug 26 2008, 03:15 AM

Quote:
 
D.S. Khavkin: "First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles."


Quote:
 
We live in Arlington, VA just outside of Washington, DC in a high-rise building on the eight floor. Our balcony faces the city, with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC. We were watching the events unfolding on TV in New York. Then, at about 9:40 am Eastern Daylight Time, my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead. At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle.

First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side the Pentagon.

First, could you point out where Ms. Khavkin specifically stated "This is what I/we saw"?

I must have missed that point.

Second, until you verify that Ms. Khavkin was living, back in 2001, in the building you posted such nice pictures of and took a drive-by of, you have no case and your post was nothing more than a waste of bandwidth. For all you know she could have very easily been living on the 8th floor of the towers just to the north west of Pentagon City. Which would make your post really silly.

WHY would somone give an interview where they would blatantly misrepresent and lie (since it would be an intentional misleading of facts) everything about their location and what they could see?
If someone says they had a viw "...with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC" and they actually lived in a hollow down Columbia Pike where they can't see squat but the back end of an old hotel, don't you think a bit more investigative gumption is called for before you start throwing claims of BS around?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
22205
Member Avatar
Arlingtonian
skeptic304
 
First, could you point out where Ms. Khavkin specifically stated "This is what I/we saw"?
I must have missed that point.

yes you must have, but it wasnt my fault. blame it on your retarded, pseudoskepticism. re-read her alleged words and tell me - if she isnt claiming she saw what she's describing, then why or how is she even describing it in the first place? shouldnt her account end with her description of the sound of the plane overhead, if she didNt see anything? and if she didnt see anything she is describing in her email, then why is it pseudoskeptics cite her as a witness to the lightpoles/impact? if she didNt claim to SEE something, then why the fuck are we even talking about her?



skeptic304
 
WHY would somone give an interview where they would blatantly misrepresent and lie (since it would be an intentional misleading of facts) everything about their location and what they could see?

why indeed? call khavkin and ask her.



skeptic304
 
If someone says they had a viw "...with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC" and they actually lived in a hollow down Columbia Pike where they can't see squat but the back end of an old hotel, don't you think a bit more investigative gumption is called for before you start throwing claims of BS around?


although 2001 columbia pike does have a "panoramic" view of the city (DC), its view of the pentagon is blocked. but is is hardly a "hollow down columbia pike", in fact it is the tallest building (other than the sheraton) on that western part of the pike. if by "bs claims" you are referring to the false allegations attributed to Khavkin, then yes, they are bs claims. the "investigative gumption" you are referring to, is what i have displayed by picking her account apart. sorry if thats not good enough for you and sorry if you're too biased to look it at objectively. but sorry is all you are and ever will be dipshit, so save your accusations for a time when you've exhibited some of your own "investigative gumption". for now however, you can just keep pissing in the wind.




skeptic304
 
For all you know she could have very easily been living on the 8th floor of the towers just to the north west of Pentagon City.


ok billybob304 - since you're local, you should have no trouble verifying this:

call the arlington central library, and reach the "virginia room" 703 228 5966. there they have old phonebooks. i spoke with Marilyn (today 9/11/08), and she said they have 2 Verizon phonebooks, one for 2000-01 another for 2002-03, as well as the 2000 Arlington whitebook. in all 3 of those phonebooks, there was a Vova Khavkin (probably deb's husband) listed at 2005 columbia pike, with phone number:

seven zero three - five two one - three eight four seven,

which STILL happens to be DS Khavkin's phone number TODAY (<--link):

Posted Image



as mentioned before, 2001, 2003 and 2005 columbia pike, ARE ALL THE SAME BUILDING, though sectioned into 3 addresses:

Posted Image




in the BBC email (NOT INTERVIEW - pay attention next time dipshit) DS Khavkin stated she was in her EIGHTH FLOOR apartment on 911 when she SAW the plane hit the poles and impact the building:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1540586.stm

bbc email
 
We live in Arlington, VA just outside of Washington, DC in a high-rise building on the eight floor. Our balcony faces the city, with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC. We were watching the events unfolding on TV in New York. Then, at about 9:40 am Eastern Daylight Time, my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead. At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle.

First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side the Pentagon. A huge fireball exploded with thick black smoke. Fire and rescue vehicles arrived soon thereafter and begin to attempt to put out the fire and rescue victims. Since then, the West side of the Pentagon has collapsed and is still smouldering. The city of Washington, DC and Northern Virginia where the Pentagon and many other defence-related facilities are located is under a state of emergency and high alert, with helicopters and F-16s flying overheard. The enormity of what we witnessed and what has happened has just begun to sink in. We just thank God we are okay and that it happened in Washington, DC where we are prepared to handle situations such as this.

D. S. Khavkin, Arlington, VA, USA




so at most, i was wrong by roughly 300 horizontal feet about Khavkin's location:

Posted Image



but even from - or perhaps especially from that location (2005 col.pike), the pentagon and the poles COULD NOT BE SEEN. not only is the elevation not high enough, but the SHERATON directly blocks the view of the (the annex buildings AND the) pentagon:

Posted Image


so what now mr.smarty pants 304? funny how bold and belligerent you get when hiding behind pseudonyms and aliases, huh mr.paisley? regardless of screen names however, you still have a reading comprehension problem, so pay closer attention next time. khavkin's original account was NOT an interview, but an email sent to the BBC's website. so like the wheelhouse mistake you made, you continue to miss simple things like you have some sort of major malfunction. wisen up, and at least try to get the known facts straight. maybe even try doing some research of your own, BEFORE you try to condescend me and dismiss my efforts/observations.


if and when i get a chance i will get over to the central library and get copies or pics of the khavkin address listed in the 2000-03 phonebooks that Marilyn was kind enough to help me with over the phone today. but if you dont believe me, call her and you'll see im not making it up. shit - better yet, call khavkin herself and see what she has to say. i dare ya. she wont return CIT's calls, so maybe a skeptical douche like yourself might have better luck. or maybe not - it seems DS Khavkin does NOT want to talk.


i wonder why?






Edited by 22205, Sep 11 2008, 03:40 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SPreston
Member Avatar
Patriotic American
streetcar304 aka pinch aka Sweet Pea aka Bill Paisley aka dipshit aka billybob304 aka mr.smarty pants 304?
 
WHY would somone give an interview where they would blatantly misrepresent and lie (since it would be an intentional misleading of facts) everything about their location and what they could see?

22205
 
shit - better yet, call khavkin herself and see what she has to say. i dare ya. she wont return CIT's calls, so maybe a skeptical douche like yourself might have better luck. or maybe not - it seems DS Khavkin does NOT want to talk.


i wonder why?

Just like all of the other media invented official south side 'witnesses', Khavkin wants nothing to do with her own BS statements. I wonder if the media deliberately misquoted her or if the FBI manufactured her story or if Khavkin made it up herself? She could not possibly have seen what her statement claimed she saw. She could not even see the Pentagon. Her view was blocked by the 15+ story Sheraton from seeing the decoy aircraft above the Navy Annex and North of the Citgo. An alleged 'hundreds' of 'witnesses' for the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) and not one is worth a damn. No wonder these pseudoskeptics and government loyalists do not want to go down there and search out witnesses to the OCT. What a fruitless and impossible task that would be. Nobody would stand by their tales.

Posted Image

D. S. Khavkin Arlington VA USA
 
We live in Arlington, VA just outside of Washington, DC in a high-rise building on the eight floor. Our balcony faces the city, with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC. We were watching the events unfolding on TV in New York. Then, at about 9:40 am Eastern Daylight Time, my husband and I heard an aircraft directly overhead. At first, we thought it was the jets that sometimes fly overhead. However, it appeared to be a small commercial aircraft. The engine was at full throttle.

First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon and crashed on the lawn near the west side the Pentagon.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/1540586.stm


Edited by SPreston, Sep 12 2008, 07:22 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
SPreston
Member Avatar
Patriotic American
Sweet Pea we know you guys see nothing wrong with witnesses blatantly misrepresenting and lying as long as they protect your precious status quo.
Don't act so surprised. OUR mainstream news media and OUR FBI have a long history of inventing fake witnesses and fake evidence. FBI whistleblowers have repeatedly told us so and many media persons have exposed their own in the past.

pinch Paisley
 
WHY would somone give an interview where they would blatantly misrepresent and lie (since it would be an intentional misleading of facts) everything about their location and what they could see?
If someone says they had a viw "...with a panoramic view of the Pentagon, National Airport, and the entire downtown area of Washington, DC" and they actually lived in a hollow down Columbia Pike where they can't see squat but the back end of an old hotel, don't you think a bit more investigative gumption is called for before you start throwing claims of BS around?


Posted Image

Quote:
 

Perhaps D. S. Khavkin did hear the decoy aircraft as it flew by. But in the split second the decoy aircraft would have been visible from her 8th floor apartment at address 2005, (or address 2001) it is highly unlikely she would have seen it before it disappeared behind the Sheraton as it flew over the Navy Annex which she could not see most of. Since she was watching the events at the WTC on her TV, it is most unlikely she was out on her balcony which would have restricted her view outside even more. Regardless, the Navy Annex would have completely blocked her view of the Pentagon, as a person on the top floor of the taller 15+ story Sheraton could just barely see the Pentagon over the Navy Annex. Obviously Ms Khavkin is afraid of exposure from her public statement.

Overhead view from Khavkin apartment to Pentagon

No wonder the pseudoskeptics and government loyalists and shills are so frightened to go to Virginia to attempt to locate and verify the 'hundreds of witnesses' to the official south Flight 77 flight path. It would be an impossible task because none of the 'hundreds of witnesses' would want to be publicly connected to their false alleged testimonies; especially on video. Gee, what if in the future some zealous prosecutor decided to prosecute them as an accessory after the fact or even some as an accessory before the fact with foreknowledge? Thus except for the media shills who keep changing their stories, the 'hundreds of witnesses' have become 'where did they go?'. None of the CIT interviewed eyewitnesses were afraid to appear on video because they were telling the truth. They just honestly explained what they saw.

Thus the actual aircraft flew over the Navy Annex and north of the Citgo, and the official southern Flight 77 flight path through the light poles is totally impossible, and no aircraft impacted the Pentagon. The actual flight path north of the Citgo could not possibly have lined up with the manufactured official path of destruction up to and through the Pentagon 1st floor to the official Exit Hole in the A&E Drive. The Flight 77 impact is not even possible.

Posted Image
Edited by SPreston, Sep 13 2008, 05:36 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
streetcar304

22205
Sep 11 2008, 03:36 PM
Quote:
 
First, could you point out where Ms. Khavkin specifically stated "This is what I/we saw"?
I must have missed that point.

yes you must have, but it wasnt my fault. blame it on your retarded, pseudoskepticism. re-read her alleged words and tell me - if she isnt claiming she saw what she's describing, then why or how is she even describing it in the first place?
So....I guess what you are telling me is that she *didn't* preface her comments with "This is what I/we saw". I've seen that alot in these "quotes" from "interviews". People would state what they *did* see then they continued on with accepted and conventional knowledge of what happened, even though they didn't actually see it.

Attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism. You'd almost think you were putting words in her mouth, attributing eyewitness testimony to her when she when she never, ever said "I saw this and that", and then accusing her of lying.

And we know the LC folks would never do that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

streetcar304
Sep 16 2008, 07:48 AM
22205
Sep 11 2008, 03:36 PM
Quote:
 
First, could you point out where Ms. Khavkin specifically stated "This is what I/we saw"?
I must have missed that point.

yes you must have, but it wasnt my fault. blame it on your retarded, pseudoskepticism. re-read her alleged words and tell me - if she isnt claiming she saw what she's describing, then why or how is she even describing it in the first place?
So....I guess what you are telling me is that she *didn't* preface her comments with "This is what I/we saw". I've seen that alot in these "quotes" from "interviews". People would state what they *did* see then they continued on with accepted and conventional knowledge of what happened, even though they didn't actually see it.

Attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism. You'd almost think you were putting words in her mouth, attributing eyewitness testimony to her when she when she never, ever said "I saw this and that", and then accusing her of lying.

And we know the LC folks would never do that.
OMG. This is priceless.

Um Pinchcar, you do know that YOUR crew of deviant misfits are the ones who attribute those words to what she saw don't you? Your idiotic cohorts are the ones who latch onto her as a witness who saw light poles get clipped or saw the plane hit, genius.

Our VERY intelligent friend, 22205, happened to assume, for the sake of argument, that she was allegedly describing what she saw and proved that it wasn't possible one way or the other.

"Attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism."

Fucking duh. Ya think? It isn't exactly honest "skepticism" or "critical thinking" either, is it? Isn't that what we've been saying? Isn't that our point about witness deduction and why we actually critically analyze and verify accounts/POV's? Now you are being a nitpicky biatch trying to flip it on 22205. You literally used the very argument we've been using against your troop of circus clown pals.

Now that 22205 bitchslapped the crew cut out of you, you have to move the goal posts and shift the argument to 22205 running away with her words when he did nothing of the sort. He proved definitively she couldn't see shit but what she thought was a small plane go by.

Done and done.

Now take your ass home.
Edited by Aldo Marquis CIT, Sep 16 2008, 03:42 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
streetcar304

Aldo Marquis CIT
Sep 16 2008, 03:37 PM
streetcar304
Sep 16 2008, 07:48 AM
22205
Sep 11 2008, 03:36 PM
Quote:
 
First, could you point out where Ms. Khavkin specifically stated "This is what I/we saw"?
I must have missed that point.

yes you must have, but it wasnt my fault. blame it on your retarded, pseudoskepticism. re-read her alleged words and tell me - if she isnt claiming she saw what she's describing, then why or how is she even describing it in the first place?
So....I guess what you are telling me is that she *didn't* preface her comments with "This is what I/we saw". I've seen that alot in these "quotes" from "interviews". People would state what they *did* see then they continued on with accepted and conventional knowledge of what happened, even though they didn't actually see it.

Attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism. You'd almost think you were putting words in her mouth, attributing eyewitness testimony to her when she when she never, ever said "I saw this and that", and then accusing her of lying.

And we know the LC folks would never do that.
Fucking duh, yeah!

Hey Aldo! Can you tell me where in her comments Mrs Khavkin said "This is what I saw"? She never did. Your little buddy Arlington Zip Code debunked something that didn't need to be debunked because she never said that was what she saw.

Why would she say she saw something when she couldn't see it?

I'll say it again - attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism. You'd almost think you were putting words in her mouth, attributing eyewitness testimony to her when she when she never, ever said "I saw this and that", and then accusing her of lying.

And we know the CIT Boys would never do that.

Lie, I mean.

Or be dishonest.

Ever.

Well, for the most part. Aside from you interpretation of that Terry Morin part about "along the outer edge of the FOB" or Lagasse and Bogers and all the others claim the aircraft hit the building.

Hey! I've been meaning to ask ol' Craig - perhaps you could pass this on for me? You have this big ol' hard-on for saying the evidence provided by the government is not acceptable or something like that - what was it? Oh yeah..."government-controlled invalid evidence" or "all data that has been controlled and provided for by the government is automatically invalid evidence " or something like that.

if that is the case, why do you believe the stories put out by SGT LaGasse or SGT Brooks or Officer Roberts? All of them employees of the federal government. Terry Morin, even though you bastardized his account into something not even close to what it was, was a contractor working for a government organization. Sean Boger - taking only HALF his comments (the half you like) and discounting the half you DON'T like, government employee.

So, I guess, the fact of the matter is that you *do* like "government-controlled" and "government provided evidence", but only when it fits your theory. Not exactly an unbiased approach, wouldn't you agree? Of course you would.

Interesting.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
22205
Member Avatar
Arlingtonian
pinch/304: first you insultingly implied i was wrong about khavkin's location in 2001, and after proof to the contrary you now pull an obfuscation101, which im sure everyone but yourself can see the ridiculousness of. twisting the implied meaning of khavkin's words in attempt to create a semantic whirlpool of confusion, is the only tactic you have left when faced with my INVESTIGATIVE GUMPTION, so forgive me for not being terribly surprised.

but looky here sweetpea: if you are saying that DS Khavkin did NOT see the plane hit the poles or the building, then we (you and i) are in agreement. so thank you for finally conceding that point, even if you had to get there by injecting a bunch of interference, incredulity, and insult.

now if mark roberts or any one of close to a dozen other "debunking" sites whom explicitly assert that Khavkin is a plane/pole witness - if these debunking sites would have the intellectual and moral honesty to update and correct the incorrect info attributed to Khavkin on their pages, i - on behalf of the TRUTH - would be much obliged.

and perhaps thats the key context 304 keeps accidentally or intentionally missing. i set out to refute mark roberts' list of witnesses, to prove that most (if not all) of them did NOT see the plane hit the poles, or the plane impact the building. i never twisted khavkin's words one way or the other, the duhbunkers did. so i responded by doing the research necessary to disprove their false claims.

so if you have an issue with the implications and assertions made based Khavkin's account, take it up with the pseudo-skeptics, not me. i knew she didnt see anything past the Sheraton, but instead of asserting it blindly, i did the research necessary to prove it conclusively. i believe its called "investigative gumption", and perhaps you could apply a bit more of it, instead of your continued hard-headed soodoskepticism mr.paisley. or you can continue to expose your own intellectual short-comings and die-hard confirmation bias in favor of the Official Conspiracy Theory about 19 arabs with boxcutters.

the choice is yours.



***


speaking of "hard-ons":

streetcar304 - didnt you as the user "pinch", (claim to) leave here on your volition? why did you pretend to wanna leave, if you knew you couldnt quit obssessing? didnt i invite you to stay when you threw your teenage "im leaving - goodbye!" hissyfit? so why didnt you just stay here as "pinch"?


:blink:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
Fucking duh, yeah!


Really?

Quote:
 
Hey Aldo! Can you tell me where in her comments Mrs Khavkin said "This is what I saw"? She never did. Your little buddy Arlington Zip Code debunked something that didn't need to be debunked because she never said that was what she saw.


Did you even read my post or are you on auto-response? 22205 and I know this is not what she saw. This is what we've been arguing. Are you ok?

Quote:
 
Why would she say she saw something when she couldn't see it?


Exactly. Why? Why don't you ask that question of your fellow numbskulls who claim that is what she saw? But correct me if I am wrong wasn't your issue 22205 proving she lived there in 2001? Fucking duh is right.

Quote:
 
I'll say it again - attributing comments to a witness as "eyewitness testimony" when she in no way, shape or form said she saw that is not exactly honest journalism. You'd almost think you were putting words in her mouth, attributing eyewitness testimony to her when she when she never, ever said "I saw this and that", and then accusing her of lying.


Who accused her of lying psycho? Seriously are they paying you to spew this shit or are you doing this of your own free will? Do you understand yet that YOUR PEOPLE are the ones who wanted oh so badly for her to have seen those things. Don't you get what we do yet? haha.

Quote:
 
And we know the CIT Boys would never do that.


That's right, Clowncar304. And we never have regarding Khavkin.

Quote:
 
Lie, I mean.


I agree, I mean.

Quote:
 
Or be dishonest.


Right.

Quote:
 
Ever.


Ever. Especially when we interview witnesses. Innuendo don't work Clowncar304. People are smarter than that. But I know desperate times call for desperate measures huh traitor? You know what they do to traitors don't you Pinch?

Quote:
 
Well, for the most part. Aside from you interpretation of that Terry Morin part about "along the outer edge of the FOB"


He put it over FOB to his left as he was standing in between the wings. He said there is no way it was on the south side of Columbia Pike. You know, where it was supposed to be. ; )

Quote:
 
or Lagasse and Bogers and all the others claim the aircraft hit the building.


You mean the aircraft they all saw the north side of the Citgo? That aircraft? The one that couldn't hit the poles or the building if it was on the north side? That aircraft?

Quote:
 
Hey! I've been meaning to ask ol' Craig - perhaps you could pass this on for me? You have this big ol' hard-on for saying the evidence provided by the government is not acceptable or something like that - what was it? Oh yeah..."government-controlled invalid evidence" or "all data that has been controlled and provided for by the government is automatically invalid evidence " or something like that.


Uh huh.

Quote:
 
if that is the case, why do you believe the stories put out by SGT LaGasse or SGT Brooks or Officer Roberts? All of them employees of the federal government.


Because they are human beings who went on camera. Not inanimate data supplied by the gov't. Come on, Clowncar304. You are running out of material ain't ya?


Quote:
 
Terry Morin, even though you bastardized his account into something not even close to what it was, was a contractor working for a government organization.


So? Are you a conspiracy theorist? Are you accusing him of being in on it? Does their flight path contradict the OS or not? Why would we need to doubt them for being gov't employees if they saw the official flight path according to your warped mind? Logic. It's a bitch.


Quote:
 
Sean Boger - taking only HALF his comments (the half you like) and discounting the half you DON'T like, government employee.


Discarding? He saw it on the north side and fucking argued that the gate cam video didn't look like what the plane did or rather should have done. He guessed that it hit at the 2nd and 3rd floor. HE DIDN'T SEE IT HIT. Again, your example is weak much like your case for an impact.

Quote:
 
So, I guess, the fact of the matter is that you *do* like "government-controlled" and "government provided evidence", but only when it fits your theory. Not exactly an unbiased approach, wouldn't you agree? Of course you would.


God STFU. Seriously, in a month or two you will come back to this thread and think "What the F was I thinking?". You may not even recognize your own writing and thoughts. An unhealthy obsession will do that to you.

Quote:
 
Interesting.


Indeed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
22205
Member Avatar
Arlingtonian
i was passing by 2005 col.pike today and saw some workers up on the roof of Khavkin's building, so i knew i could get up there and get some pics of her POV. here they are:

Posted Image



pic taken from location A:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image


pic taken from location B:

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image



therefore: DS Khavkin, who resided at 2005 columbia pike in september of 2001, could not and did not see the impact.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

You big ol' investigangsta you. I LOVE IT!!!

They officially just lost another one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
noeffects
Member Avatar

thank you. good photo evidence.

where is DS Khavkin now?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

noeffects
Oct 15 2008, 10:11 AM
where is DS Khavkin now?
I don't know. I think she is still there.

But a better question is where is Pinch/Streetcar304 now?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic »
Add Reply