Barbara Honegger's Theories, Why the "acceptable" disinfo?

post Aug 25 2013, 10:23 PM
Post #1

Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095

This is the first of several posts that take a closer look at Ms Barbara Honegger's research and theories regarding the Pentagon.

The gist of which are contained in this presentation:


It's claimed that the "violent event", that is, an aircraft entering the Pentagon basin and the resultant explosion, occurred at 09:32am based on timepieces that had allegedly stopped at this time the morning of 9/11.

A host of other contradictory and ambiguous claims are made.

1. "09:32am" Part One

2. "09:32am" Part Two

3. "The helicopter that destroyed the plane"

4. "Millions of pieces of aircraft debris"

5. "Alan Wallace — south of Navy Annex path"

6. Penny Elgas

7. Jim Sutherland

8. "Multiple south of Navy Annex witnesses"

9. "No gouges" on the lawn.

10. Wedge 2

11. The "violent event"

12. April Gallop

13. The NOC witnesses

14. The alleged "helipad witnesses"

15. Lloyd England

16. The Global Hawk

17. Sean Boger

18. Sean Boger Part Two

19. The "white plane" — Part One

20. The "white plane" — Part Two

21. Dwain Deets and the directional damage

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Sep 27 2013, 05:51 PM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Start new topic
post Sep 12 2013, 03:12 PM
Post #2

Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095

Sean Boger Part Two

Finally, Boger’s testimonies — there were more than one — do, as the below quotes from his interviews and analysis shows, clearly support that he experienced two plane approaches approximately three minutes apart:

Statements by Pentagon heliport tower controller Sean Boger are sometimes cited as evidence that the white plane Pentagon heliport firefighters Wallace and Skipper ran to avoid just below and to the south/left of Boger’s heliport control tower hit the Pentagon wall, but Boger has given contradictory testimony on this point, which throws some doubt on both of the versions. In one version, he told the Center for Military History on Nov. 14, 2001, “This particular day [Sept. 11], we [Boger and second tower controller Jackie Kidd] heard something. We heard a rooooaaah [roar]. And so [Jackie] was like [she asked], ‘what was that?’ And we both looked out the [tower] window, but we didn’t see anything. And that was the airplane, and he [the pilot] had flown past us. But we didn’t see him, but we heard it,” [emphasis added]..X226 Then, as if with regret, he adds that he might have been able to do something – presumably prevent the plane from returning — if only he had seen it and been able to make a call to some authority in time. By contrast, in the same Nov. 2001 interview, Boger claimed that Kidd had left the control tower to go to the ladies room downstairs in the firehouse after which, then alone in the tower, he did see an incoming plane: “…I look out the [heliport control tower] window and I just hear a [roar] — I just see the nose and the wing of an aircraft just like coming right at us, and he didn’t veer. And then you just heard the noise, and then he just smacked into the building.”

Barbara Honegger

I've snipped a large portion of this rambling, incoherent, illogical and dishonest rant by Ms Honegger.

First off, there was only one CMH (Center for Military History) interview despite Ms Honegger's attempt to imply that there were a number of interviews.

The alleged discrepancies that Ms Honegger is referring to are contained within the one interview. And the sequence of two sections of the interview has been swapped around.


The alleged discrepancy begins on Page 10, where Sean Boger talks about co worker Jackie Kidd going to the bathroom for 5 minutes after having discussed the fears he had claimed to have had given the proximity of the airport to the Pentagon, that opened up the possibility of an accident occurring there.

He then goes on to describe the aircraft appearing on the scene and the alleged impact. He does not say that he heard a "roar" at this stage of the interview.

The quote ad verbatim is "I look out the window and I just hear a -- I just see like the nose and the wing just like coming right at us...And then you just hear the noise..."

Ms Honegger has inserted the word "roar" into the sentence where a gap or pause has been denoted.

He then discusses the aftermath, his wife etc and later on in the same interview on Page 22, the interviewer prods him for more details on his memories and he begins to discuss the aircraft again. He also discusses communications with Reagan International and the air traffic in the area.

At this stage he does mention both he and Jackie Kidd hearing the "roooah" and attributed it to the decoy jet.

The "more than one" testimonies Ms Honegger is referring to is the CIT interview conducted by Aldo Marquis


5 minutes in...

"You know we (Sean Boger and Jacqueline Kidd) heard a 'vroom', just a loud noise you know, outside of the Pentagon.....I said, you know I'm still surprised nobody has ever flown into the Pentagon....she went downstairs and went into the restroom and umm I just happened to be looking out the window....I could see a plane...it was actually like three minutes later"

This is where it gets ridiculous. Ms Honegger then says..

The loud noise Boger heard just before he says it crashed was likely the wing of the plane seen by many witnesses to have hit the helipad before hit exploded into a fireball.

She is simply trying to make his testimony as ambiguous as possible.

The first noise he described was the "roooah" that both he and (allegedly) Jackie Kidd heard "5 minutes" before he saw the one and only aircraft he or any other witness on record describes seconds before the explosion.

The second unspecified "noise" he describes was just before the explosion. Though he never specifies just what that "noise" was, he did not say "roar" as Ms Honegger has dishonestly inserted into his testimony.

Some witnesses within the area described the aircraft as sounding like it was in "full throttle" or that it sped up as it approached the Pentagon.
It may have been the Doppler Effect on the sound of the engines as it approached the Pentagon basin?


To further narrow down what this "noise" was, one only has to read the testimony of firefighter Alan Wallace who was just below the heliport.

Others didn't understand why we didn't hear it sooner. We did not hear it until right after we saw it. I estimate that the plane hit the building only 1.5-2 seconds after we saw it. What I am saying is, immediately after we saw it, we heard the noise; the engines, I'm sure.


Sean Boger claimed to have the aircraft in view for over "8 seconds" (Terry Morin and William Middleton confirmed this estimated period of time).

Alan Wallace claimed to only hear it ("the engines") "1.5-2 seconds" before the explosion.

To actually claim that the "noise" Boger referred to was the wing striking the helipad??

Some very important points should be made here. Regardless of the, at best, ambiguous claims regarding the helipad allegedly being struck by the left wing, let's look at where the helipad is in relation to the official path/"south of the Navy Annex path"

At what point could the wing physically strike the helipad? Or even appear to do so?

And for those familiar with the wings of an aircraft, even the laymen among us (like myself), at what angle would this aircraft have to be for the wing to actually strike the helipad??

Edit added:

And where is the evidence of the helipad being struck? (Image pointed out to me by Rob Balsamo)


Remember that Ms Honegger's theory requires the immediate and complete desintegration of the aircraft within the 400ft length of the Pentagon lawn on the official path she ambiguously pushes.

Remember that her insistence on the left wing striking the helipad actually halves that distance.


Remember that she rejects the lightpoles being damaged by any aircraft and that the aircraft would have to go over the undamaged poles to the north of the official path...(this should give a clue as to her ambiguity over the "south of the Navy Annex" path)


...and go into an aerodynamically impossible dive, with the left wing striking the helipad, and according to one witness quoted by her, appear to bounce up in to the "third floor" level.

Look at this picture again where the heliport is marked:

At which point exactly did Sean Boger hear the "noise" of the left wing striking
the helipad before this chaotic, explosive event that would have been over in a fraction of a second?

As for Ms Honegger's attempts to muddy the waters over what Sean Boger described, there actually is corroboration from multiple sources of an aircraft circling from Washington in to Pentagon airspace.

There's ABC's Peter Jennings reported an aircraft "circling the White House" at 09:41am (before the E4B was officially airborne)

The Dulles ATCs that Sean Boger claimed (in his CIT interview) to have corroborated his testimony...


Not a great source but based on Dulles ATC interviews regarding the radar data they saw, National Geographic came up with these paths

NOC witness William Middleton 34mins into this video (Middleton interview at 36min):


And witness Steve Chaconas


What's infuriatingly absurd and hypocritical is that when Ms Honegger goes off on a spin regarding what individual NOC witnesses "actually" experienced, whether it's the "two plane", "flyover then coming back round to impact" or the mysterious "south of the Navy Annex but not actually on the directional damage path" yarns, is that she will apply each yarn to individual witnesses. She never discusses the NOC testimony as a whole.

Irrespective of the fact that many of these witnesses were within the same area and corroborate seeing one aircraft, on the NOC flightpath, and an explosion seconds later, she will tag whatever yarn to whatever individual situation.

Even to the point where she will claim that some had "actually" seen the aircraft that "flew over" without the massive explosion and fireball, circled back round, flew along a path that nobody describes and blew up on the helipad.

And even though she has taken the directional damage out of the equation, even the alleged impact zone, she'll claim that "whatever plane" the NOC witnesses saw, it couldn't have flown over because they "heard" the explosion. But will hypocritically claim that the alleged "first flyover", without the massive explosion and fireball was missed??

Seriously? 12 years after the event, reams of research on witness testimony, and people are still entertaining these "theories" whose sole purpose are to act as a pressure valve on an OCT firmly wedged into a very tight corner?

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Sep 20 2013, 09:38 PM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Posts in this topic
- onesliceshort   Barbara Honegger's Theories   Aug 25 2013, 10:23 PM
- - onesliceshort   "09:32am" Part One Ms Honegger claims...   Aug 25 2013, 10:24 PM
- - onesliceshort   "09:32am" Part Two I've never seen...   Aug 25 2013, 10:30 PM
- - onesliceshort   "The Helicopter that destroyed the plane...   Aug 25 2013, 11:27 PM
- - onesliceshort   "Millions of pieces of aircraft debris" ...   Aug 25 2013, 11:38 PM
- - onesliceshort   "Alan Wallace - south of Navy Annex path witn...   Aug 25 2013, 11:53 PM
- - onesliceshort   "Penny Elgas" Ms Honegger claims that ...   Aug 26 2013, 06:30 AM
- - onesliceshort   Jim Sutherland Ms Honegger claims that alleged wi...   Aug 26 2013, 06:36 AM
- - onesliceshort   "Multiple south of Navy Annex witnesses...   Aug 26 2013, 09:53 AM
- - onesliceshort   "No gouges" on the lawn. Contradictoril...   Aug 26 2013, 10:14 AM
- - onesliceshort   Wedge 2 Ms Honegger claims that the "lawn i...   Aug 26 2013, 10:28 AM
- - onesliceshort   The "violent event" QUOTE "Non ins...   Aug 26 2013, 06:16 PM
- - onesliceshort   April Gallop Ms Honegger alleges that "9/11...   Aug 26 2013, 09:43 PM
- - onesliceshort   The NOC witnesses QUOTE I believe the interpretat...   Aug 27 2013, 05:38 PM
|- - A. Syed   QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Aug 27 2013, 04:38...   Sep 3 2013, 11:00 PM
- - Pablo   OSS, You are absolutely tenacious. Excellent, pain...   Aug 27 2013, 10:45 PM
|- - onesliceshort   QUOTE (Pablo @ Aug 28 2013, 03:45 AM) OSS...   Aug 27 2013, 11:36 PM
- - onesliceshort   I hope that those who will be in contact with Ms H...   Aug 30 2013, 06:35 AM
- - rob balsamo   Nice work OSS. Barbara came to me a while back as...   Sep 3 2013, 07:43 AM
|- - onesliceshort   QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 3 2013, 12:43 PM...   Sep 3 2013, 05:34 PM
- - onesliceshort   The Toronto Hearings on 9/11 Uncut – Barbara Honeg...   Sep 3 2013, 05:47 PM
- - onesliceshort   A glaring omission from her latest presentation wa...   Sep 3 2013, 05:57 PM
- - A. Syed   In going through your research, I've noticed s...   Sep 4 2013, 04:33 AM
- - onesliceshort   I think it's an optical illusion that the ligh...   Sep 4 2013, 08:18 AM
- - A. Syed   OSS, I think you may be right. We could be looki...   Sep 4 2013, 12:06 PM
|- - Tamborine man   QUOTE (A. Syed @ Sep 2 2013, 03:06 PM) OS...   Sep 5 2013, 05:49 AM
|- - A. Syed   QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Sep 5 2013, 04:49 ...   Sep 5 2013, 03:55 PM
|- - onesliceshort   QUOTE (A. Syed @ Sep 5 2013, 08:55 PM) To...   Sep 5 2013, 05:20 PM
- - onesliceshort   I just noticed a half hearted "response...   Sep 7 2013, 06:57 PM
- - onesliceshort   Second part of Ms Honegger's post: QUOTE Sec...   Sep 7 2013, 09:56 PM
- - Tamborine man   '.....takes a tougher vagina to set the record...   Sep 8 2013, 08:51 PM
|- - JimMac   QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Sep 8 2013, 08:51 ...   Sep 8 2013, 11:34 PM
|- - Tamborine man   QUOTE (JimMac @ Sep 7 2013, 02:34 AM) She...   Sep 9 2013, 06:31 AM
- - onesliceshort   The alleged "helipad witnesses" QUOTE...   Sep 9 2013, 06:01 PM
- - Tamborine man   The following excerpt is authored by the same ...   Sep 9 2013, 11:28 PM
|- - 23investigator   QUOTE (Tamborine man @ Sep 10 2013, 12:58...   Sep 10 2013, 05:43 AM
|- - Tamborine man   QUOTE (23investigator @ Sep 8 2013, 08:43...   Sep 10 2013, 12:14 PM
- - onesliceshort   Sean Boger Part Two QUOTE Finally, Boger’s testim...   Sep 12 2013, 03:12 PM
|- - rob balsamo   QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Sep 12 2013, 03:12...   Sep 12 2013, 06:44 PM
- - onesliceshort   Great image to make the point Rob. Cheers   Sep 12 2013, 09:00 PM
- - onesliceshort   The "white plane" — Part One QUOTE If t...   Sep 20 2013, 11:59 AM
- - onesliceshort   The "white plane" — Part Two QUOTE If t...   Sep 20 2013, 09:56 PM
- - onesliceshort   Dwain Deets and the directional damage During Ms ...   Sep 27 2013, 05:48 PM

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th January 2022 - 08:28 PM