jfetzer debate Options

[onesliceshort]

The part I have had wrong is that I (mistakenly) supposed their witnesses were affirming that the plane had passed north of the Citgo station. That is a simple and salient point, where their reliability would be high. The differences between the NTSB trajectory and what they are inferring from the witnesses is less certain.

What happens when some of those witnesses couldn't physically have seen the "NTSB trajectory" or were in a position where they could not describe certain aspects because of their surroundings?

Terry Morin was in between the wings of the Navy Annex and is on record as saying that the aircraft went over his head and that he couldn't see the stripes on the side of the plane. That description narrows the physicality of his testimony considerably.

http://www.thepentacon.com/ona.htm

He should have been able to see this according to the data and his POV:

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...rinPOVsouth.gif

06:50

¨MORIN: WHEN THE PLANE WENT RIGHT OVER THE TOP OF ME I WAS WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE EDGE OF THE WING (OF THE ANNEX)

CRAIG : SO YOU WERE KINDA IN BETWEEN THEM (THE WINGS OF THE ANNEX)

(...)

MORIN: I WAS INSIDE..FLEW OVER THE TOP OF ME¨

....

CRAIG: WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT THE PLANE FLEW ON THE SOUTHSIDE, SOUTH OF COLUMBIA PIKE?

MORIN: NO FRICKIN´ WAY. IT FLEW OVER THE TOP OF ME

....

I HAD NO SIDE-VIEW. IF I HAD HAVE HAD A SIDE-VIEW I WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE STRIPES AND IDENTIFY IT AS AN AMERICAN AIRLINES JET..I DIDN´T SEE THE STRIPES, ALL I COULD SEE WAS THE BELLY¨

(sorry for the caps...gotta fix that)


William Lagasse was at the Citgo Gas Station and was under the canopy. Looking toward the official/directional damage path from his POV, he wouldn't have and is on record as stating that he couldn't have physically described what he remembers seeing. Namely the "starboard" of the aircraft, corraborated exactly by his co officer Brooks who was not under the canopy but viewing from behind the gas station and drew the exact same flightpath.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...s/northside.gif

http://i43.tinypic.com/23jimc2.jpg

http://i40.tinypic.com/ivg1f5.jpg

Robert Turcios confirmed this and pointed to an overhead sign as a landmark which he remembered that the aircraft had to "pull up" to avoid.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...pointsnorth.gif

http://i42.tinypic.com/1znvix2.jpg

Sean Boger, who was directly facing both the gas station and the Navy Annex and whose description cannot be twisted into some "line of sight issue" as the official path is to his left for the entire duration.

http://www.thepentacon.com/SeanBogerATC.htm

http://i40.tinypic.com/sq6mus.jpg

William Middleton and all of the ANC witnesses have a memory of the aircraft coming straight for them and banking over/beside the ANC carpark.
William Middleton in particular was in a position where he could not physically see the official path (and in fact can be seen to have the most northern approach over the Annex) as it allegedly passed the south side of the Annex and detractors have to paint these people as, well, morons/liars/cointel (I kid you not) or to have jointly hallucinated the image of the aircraft's position as it came towards and passed them.

http://thepentacon.com/northsideflyover.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giX1a1qnL_w

http://i39.tinypic.com/1zlbvkk.gif

All interviews here:

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html

Chandler and Cole made the claim that this guy and apparently his "interview techniques" are above board?

This same guy found more NOC witnesses Jim. CIT have been painted as somehow hiding the "impact" testimony which is a blatant lie as all interviews are available warts and all. As to "leading" them?
Watch the interviews.

Detractor and denier of his own early solid research, Russell Pickering sent a questionnaire to Robert Turcios asking him to pinpoint where he saw the aircraft (again) and he reiterated what he had told CIT.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lyt...der%202/rt2.jpg

This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Feb 10 2011, 05:50 PM

[jfetzer]

Are these links to clips that are not included in "National Security Alert"? I have watched it before
and thought it was pretty good. Are these more complete with regard to the interviews? I have
a tentative recommendation in mind for Pilots to consider, but I will do more on this before I offer
my suggestion. I am completing a paper this evening, but I should be able to pursue this Friday.

What happens when some of those witnesses couldn't physically have seen the "NTSB trajectory" or were in a position where they could not describe certain aspects because of their surroundings?

Terry Morin was in between the wings of the Navy Annex and is on record as saying that the aircraft went over his head and that he couldn't see the stripes on the side of the plane. That description narrows the physicality of his testimony considerably.

http://www.thepentacon.com/ona.htm

He should have been able to see this according to the data and his POV:

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...rinPOVsouth.gif



(sorry for the caps...gotta fix that)


William Lagasse was at the Citgo Gas Station and was under the canopy. Looking toward the official/directional damage path from his POV, he wouldn't have and is on record as stating that he couldn't have physically described what he remembers seeing. Namely the "starboard" of the aircraft, corraborated exactly by his co officer Brooks who was not under the canopy but viewing from behind the gas station and drew the exact same flightpath.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...s/northside.gif

http://i43.tinypic.com/23jimc2.jpg

http://i40.tinypic.com/ivg1f5.jpg

Robert Turcios confirmed this and pointed to an overhead sign as a landmark which he remembered that the aircraft had to "pull up" to avoid.

http://i659.photobucket.com/albums/uu311/b...pointsnorth.gif

http://i42.tinypic.com/1znvix2.jpg

Sean Boger, who was directly facing both the gas station and the Navy Annex and whose description cannot be twisted into some "line of sight issue" as the official path is to his left for the entire duration.

http://www.thepentacon.com/SeanBogerATC.htm

http://i40.tinypic.com/sq6mus.jpg

William Middleton and all of the ANC witnesses have a memory of the aircraft coming straight for them and banking over/beside the ANC carpark.
William Middleton in particular was in a position where he could not physically see the official path (and in fact can be seen to have the most northern approach over the Annex) as it allegedly passed the south side of the Annex and detractors have to paint these people as, well, morons/liars/cointel (I kid you not) or to have jointly hallucinated the image of the aircraft's position as it came towards and passed them.

http://thepentacon.com/northsideflyover.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giX1a1qnL_w

http://i39.tinypic.com/1zlbvkk.gif

All interviews here:

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html

Chandler and Cole made the claim that this guy and apparently his "interview techniques" are above board?

This same guy found more NOC witnesses Jim. CIT have been painted as somehow hiding the "impact" testimony which is a blatant lie as all interviews are available warts and all. As to "leading" them?
Watch the interviews.

Detractor and denier of his own early solid research, Russell Pickering sent a questionnaire to Robert Turcios asking him to pinpoint where he saw the aircraft (again) and he reiterated what he had told CIT.

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a327/lyt...der%202/rt2.jpg

[GroundPounder]

truth, right? that's what we are all after, right?