April Gallop Sues American Airlines, But Claims There Was No Plane?, April Gallop Set to go to court again, but should she be supported? Options

[amazed!]

That she was wearing civilian clothes could easily be an artifact of the propaganda machine.

If she was a soldier, and on duty in the Pentagon, she would have been in uniform, is my guess.

[onesliceshort]

That she was wearing civilian clothes could easily be an artifact of the propaganda machine.

And her 2 month old son was the cherry on top...

[Ricochet]

And her 2 month old son was the cherry on top...

My point being there is inconsisticies, after Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman I am at a point of questioning everything that is related to the Pentagon.

[onesliceshort]

My point being there is inconsisticies, after Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman I am at a point of questioning everything that is related to the Pentagon.

Ric, those were propaganda puppets. April Gallop's case is totally different.
I'm no different to you in questioning every single thing as regards the Pentagon but it makes no logical sense what's being insinuated about her.

The "truth will find you out". That's the way I look at it.
The case she has brought against these people covers everything from "prior knowledge" to the ops themselves.

Her case can't affect future cases (if one is ever filed) so what is the problem?

[amazed!]

I learned in 1970 that the US Army exaggerates, prevaricates, and protects its own.

It seems to me that Gallop is not being protected in any way. My take is that she is telling the truth.

[Tamborine man]

It seems to me that Gallop is not being protected in any way. My take is that she is telling the truth.

I'll second that!

[tit2]

http://www.centerfor911justice.org/

"On April 27, 2011, the 2nd Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling. Its decision can be found under SECOND CIRCUIT DECISION below

http://www.centerfor911justice.org/news/de...d%20circuit.pdf

As those who have followed the case will be aware, this decision was no surprise in its outcome, but the Court on its own motion and without the participation of the United States Attorney issued an Order to Show Cause (OSC) why SANCTIONS in the amount of $15,000 should not be imposed as a result of our having filed what the Court considers a frivolous lawsuit, the product of cynical delusion and fantasy.

We are ordered to file a response to the OSC in thirty days. The most important aspect of the decision is its failure to allude to, much less address, any of the many pages of factual allegations contained in the Complaint or in the Appendices attached to the Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. Just as District Court Judge Denny Chin did in rendering his decision, Judge Cabranes fails to mention the three defendants at all, makes no reference to their conduct throughout the course of the crime, or their statements concerning that conduct afterward. Of course, there is, similarly, no mention of nanothermite having been found in the dust and debris at Ground Zero, in four separate, independently collected samples, and also escaping the Court's attention is the precipitous evaporation of WTC 7 at 5:20 PM that day, a textbook example of controlled demolition.

In the next week or so, we will file a Petition for Rehearing and En Banc Review before all of the judges of the 2nd Circuit. This will be an opportunity for the other judges on the bench to at least correct the appearance of Conflict of Interest that clothes the decision just made due to the presence on the panel of John M. Walker, first cousin of former President George H. W. Bush, and first cousin once removed of Former President George W. Bush, "the responsible officer of government" on 9/11, as President John F. Kennedy referred to himself after the Bay of Pigs disaster, and the man who put each of the three defendants in the position to commit mass murder and treason as, through our lawsuit, we are prepared to prove, should we ever be given the opportunity."

I was sure of this judges' decision after reading this:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/42469680

« Veale, amidst frequent interruptions from the three judges, managed to point out Cheney's direct involvement in tracking and dealing with the airplane that was heading for the Pentagon, as reported to the 9/11 Commission by then Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta, a winner of the Presidential Medal of Freedom. »

The decision of the judges had to have as objective to forbid any investigation on this subject as on others. Norman Mineta's testimony is not mentioned in their decision.

[amazed!]

Madison's principle and hope that the judiciary would be the last bulwark against tyranny have been dashed too many times.

With the judiciary leading the way, it is demonstrated almost daily that the entire federal government is utterly corrupt.

[Obwon]

http://www.centerfor911justice.org/

"On April 27, 2011, the 2nd Circuit affirmed the lower court's ruling. Its decision can be found under SECOND CIRCUIT DECISION below
<snips>

Seems like a pretty vague decision to me.

Obwon

[tit2]

Even if April Gallop's complaint was dismissed, this does not mean that she was wrong. Below are indicated a number of testimonies that confirm the assertions of April Gallop about the lack of aircraft debris and the use of explosives, as part of the Pentagon attack.

Quote of the complaint of April Gallop :

« At the Pentagon, the plaintiff was at her desk, with her baby, in her office on the first floor, when large explosions occurred, walls crumbled and the ceiling fell in.  Although her desk is just some forty feet from the supposed impact point, and she went out through the blown-open front of the building afterwards, she never saw any sign that an airliner crashed through.  If Flight 77, or a substitute, did swoop low over the building, to create the false impression of a suicide attack, it was then flown away by its pilot, or remote control, and apparently crashed someplace else.  At the building, inside or outside of the wall the plane supposedly hit, there was no wreckage, no airplane fragments, no engines, no seats, no luggage, no fuselage sections with rows of windows, and especially, no blazing quantities of burning jet fuel.  The interior walls and ceilings and contents in that area were destroyed, but there was no sign of a crashed airplane.  A number of those present inside the building and out have attested to this fact in published reports. »

1) The lack of major plane debris at the Flight 77 crash site at the Pentagon:

See : Context of 'After 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001: Some Witnesses Surprised by Lack of Plane Debris at the Pentagon'

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...937lackofdebris

« Some emergency responders and other witnesses are surprised at the lack of major plane debris at the Flight 77 crash site at the Pentagon.

Brian Ladd of the Fort Myer Fire Department arrives at the scene a few minutes after the attack. Yet, “Expecting to see pieces of the wings or fuselage,” he instead sees “millions of tiny pieces” of debris spread “everywhere.

Captain John Durrer of the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority Fire Department also arrives within minutes of the crash. He later recalls thinking: “Well where’s the airplane, you know, where’s the parts to it? You would think there’d be something.” Reportedly, “The near total disintegration of the plane had left only a multitude of bits scattered outside the building.

Steve DeChiaro, the president of a New Jersey technology firm, had just arrived at the Pentagon when it was hit and ran toward the crash site. He later recalls: “But when I looked at the site, my brain could not resolve the fact that it was a plane because it only seemed like a small hole in the building. No tail. No wings. No nothing.

Early in the afternoon, CNN Pentagon correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports: “[T]he only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you can pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around, which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse.”

Sheryl Alleger, a Navy officer at the Pentagon, goes past the crash site in an ambulance in the afternoon. She will recall: “[Y]ou couldn’t see any bits of the airplane, that was the thing that got me.… I expected to see the tail sticking out.… But—nothing. It was like the building swallowed the plane.

Eileen Murphy, a nurse at the Pentagon’s DiLorenzo Tricare Health Clinic, will later recall: “I expected to see the airplane, so I guess my initial impression was, ‘Where’s the plane? How come there’s not a plane?’ I would have thought the building would have stopped it and somehow we would have seen something like part of, or half of the plane, or the lower part, or the back of the plane. So it was just a real surprise that the plane wasn’t there.

Sgt. Reginald Powell will say: “I was truly impressed with how the building stood up, after they told me the size of the plane. And then I was in awe that I saw no plane, nothing left from the plane. It was like it disintegrated as it went into the building.

Captain Dennis Gilroy, acting commander of the Fort Myer fire department, “wondered why he saw no aircraft parts” when he arrives at the scene.

Other witnesses say they come across some pieces of plane debris:

Rich Fitzharris, an electrical engineer working at the Pentagon, later remembers seeing “small pieces of debris, the largest of which might have been part of an engine shroud

Allyn Kilsheimer, a structural engineer who arrives at the Pentagon at about 5:00 p.m., later recalls: “I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane.

Later on during the day, the FBI arranges a search of the lawn in front of the crash site. According to the Defense Department’s book about the Pentagon attack: “Although much of the plane disintegrated within the Pentagon, the searchers found many scraps and a few personal items widely scattered on the grass and heliport. Plane remnants varied from half-dollar size to a few feet long

Also, one photo shows what appears to be plane debris on the lawn in front of the Pentagon, with the red, white, and blue stripes of American Airlines. »

Here an analysis of plane debris at the Pentagon.

http://killtown.911review.org/flight77/debris.html

It is interesting to note there are witness statements similar for the crash of Flight 93. This means that for two crashes of Boeing 757, on 11 September 2001, one in Shanksville, the other at the Pentagon, in both cases, many witnesses were surprised by the lack of aircraft debris at the scene of their crash. See: Witnesses Report Lack of Plane Wreckage at Flight 93 Crash Scene :

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...a1006nowreckage

2) The use of explosives in connection with the attack on the Pentagon:

Witness statements very interesting were reported by the website "historycommons.org" :

Context of '(9:38 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Some Officers in Area Where Pentagon Is Hit Think Bombs Have Exploded'

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...38bombsexploded

« At least three Pentagon employees in the area of the building that is hit, and who narrowly survive the attack, initially believe that what they have experienced is a bomb, or bombs, going off:

John Thurman, an Army lieutenant colonel, is in a second floor office just above where the Pentagon is hit. He later describes the moment of impact: “To me it didn’t seem like a plane.… [T]o me it seemed like it was a bomb. Being in the military, I have been around grenade, artillery explosions. It was a two-part explosion to me.… [I]t seemed like that there was a percussion blast that blew me kind of backwards in my cubicle to the side. And then it seemed as if a massive explosion went off at the same time.” He will add: “I had thought that perhaps the terrorists had surreptitiously gotten construction workers to come in and place explosives.”

Lt. Nancy McKeown is on the first floor of the Pentagon’s D Ring in the Navy Command Center, which is mostly destroyed when the building is hit. She will recall: “[I]t initially felt like an earthquake.… It sounded like a series of explosions going off.… It sounded like a series of bombs exploding, similar to like firecrackers when you light them and you just get a series going off.” She yells out to her colleagues, “Bomb!”

Army Lt. Col. Brian Birdwell is returning to his second floor office, and is just yards from where the building is impacted. “Bomb! I thought,” he recalls of the moment the building is hit.

Context of '(9:38 a.m.) September 11, 2001: ‘Experienced Combat Arms Officers’ at Pentagon Think a Bomb Has Exploded There'

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...8combatofficers

A group of Army officers at the Pentagon initially thinks that a bomb has gone off in their building when it is attacked. Army Major Craig Collier and his colleagues are in their office on the second floor of the Pentagon’s C Ring, about 200 feet from where the building is hit. Collier will later recall: “[T]he building jolted and we heard a muffled boom, then a rumble.… All of my peers in the area are experienced combat arms officers, and we quickly agreed that it sounded and felt like a bomb.” Numerous other Pentagon employees also initially think a bomb has gone off, and apparently only a few guess a plane has hit the place.

Context of '(9:38 a.m.) September 11, 2001: Some inside Pentagon Think a Bomb Has Exploded There'

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?...b#a938thinkbomb

Even though two planes have already crashed in New York, some people in the Pentagon initially think a bomb has gone off when their building is hit:

Steve Carter, who is in the Building Operations Command Center on the first floor of the Pentagon, hears a “big boom,” and tells his assistant, “I think we just got hit by a bomb.

John Bowman, a retired Marine lieutenant colonel, is in his office near the main entrance to the Pentagon’s south parking lot at the time of the attack. He later describes, “Most people knew it was a bomb.

Army Colonel Jonathan Fruendt is in his second floor office in the Pentagon’s inner A Ring, when he feels and hears “a very sharp jolt and the sound of an explosion.” He later recalls, “I thought it was a bomb that had gone off.

Apparently only a few people in the Pentagon initially guess a plane has hit the place. According to the Defense Department’s book about the Pentagon attack, among the few exceptions are Peter Murphy and his companions in the Marine Corps Office of the General Counsel, located on the fourth floor just above where the building is hit: “Unlike most other survivors, Murphy and his companions ‘were pretty certain it was a plane and it was a terrorist,’ even though they had not seen the plane coming in. They had been watching the attack on the Twin Towers and had speculated about such an attack on the Pentagon. »

Even if these witnesses did not see the plane approaching the Pentagon, it is surprising that a few seconds before the impact of the Boeing 757 on the pentagon, these witnesses did not hear the noise of the engines of this aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bFh2NeD32Y

[onesliceshort]

Here are a couple more tit2


Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret)
http://patriotsquestion911.com/

There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner....I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

Bob Pugh – Pentagon eyewitness. Freelance video and still photographer

Im looking for wreckage and I don't see anything discernable. I can't find a piece of anything I recognize. I can't see the tail. I can't see the wheels. I can't see the engines. There's no chairs. There's no luggage. There's no logo. I mean, for Air Florida, when we shot that, you could see the logo of the Air Florida plane. There was identifiable structures that you could see with that kind of an impact and that aircraft. ...

[amazed!]

Well done tit2! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)

And OSS

But I would submit that if there actually WERE a Boeing approaching the building you were in, you would not hear the engines until about the same time as the actual impact, assuming the mythical bird were doing 300 knots or so.

[tit2]

Well done tit2! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)

And OSS

But I would submit that if there actually WERE a Boeing approaching the building you were in, you would not hear the engines until about the same time as the actual impact, assuming the mythical bird were doing 300 knots or so.

Are you sure ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ys41jnL2Elk


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XELamUnF0EU

[onesliceshort]

Don't want to confuse the issue even more (nor taking sides), but at least one of the NOC witnesses claimed that the aircraft made no noise as it went over the Navy Annex. Then again, Alan Wallace who was at the heliport area claimed that it was "screaming".

Fact of the matter is, the descriptions vary both inside and outside:

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/ar/t808.htm

The renovated section of the Pentagon was allegedly soundproofed and the hollow between the Annex and the Pentagon may have played havoc with the acoustics. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/dunno.gif)

[paranoia]

northward momentum was taking the decoy jet too far north, enough to almost miss its approach to the west facade of the building (and subsequent flyover), so as the plane crossed over the pike and above the annex buildings, it slowed down - letting off the throttle (quiet). once lined up with its mark, it then pointed the nose down, went full throttle (screaming) as it dove toward the west wall of the pentagon.

anc worker and decoy jet witness donald carter is a good witness to the throttle down, and then up. i believe that dialogue is somewhere in the nsa presentation (i will try and dig it up).

[onesliceshort]

northward momentum was taking the decoy jet too far north, enough to almost miss its approach to the west facade of the building (and subsequent flyover), so as the plane crossed over the pike and above the annex buildings, it slowed down - letting off the throttle (quiet). once lined up with its mark, it then pointed the nose down, went full throttle (screaming) as it dove toward the west wall of the pentagon.

anc worker and decoy jet witness donald carter is a good witness to the throttle down, and then up. i believe that dialogue is somewhere in the nsa presentation (i will try and dig it up).

William Middleton described a "kick" and a "whistle" as it went past him too. Darius Prather, same sort of description. Then we had Turcios describing the "lift" on Route 27.

That's exactly how I see what happened P. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)

Edit: This video shows a "quiet approach" and something similar to what I believe the witnesses were describing (audio wise).

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


This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Jul 5 2011, 03:44 PM

[amazed!]

Well, we're here to talk about it, ain't we gents? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif) Even though it is a bit of "trivial pursuit", it can be fun.

My point was that as one standing on the ground, or especially inside a building, is approached by an aircraft doing 300 knots or so (which is about half the speed of sound at sea level), depending on the direction and strength of any wind blowing, the sound wave will arrive at pretty close to the same time as the aircraft.

If the aircraft were going with the wind towards the point, and especially if the wind were strong, THEN the noise might lead the aircraft to some degree.

This can be illustrated by standing next to railroad tracks and observing approaching and departing trains, and considering the ambient wind conditions. Any moving object will show the same results more or less, and it is related to the Doppler Effect. I used to observe it as a kid because we lived near the tracks. I've seen it demonstrated by airplanes and helicopters, both while on the ground and from the cockpit. If one is trying to "sneak up" on somebody on the ground, all in jest with safety considerations in place, of course, and it's a windy day, it almost always works to come from downwind. Most of the time they never hear you until you're right on top.

The faster the airplane, the more pronounced the effect.

This post has been edited by amazed!: Jul 5 2011, 04:45 PM

[rob balsamo]

Some quick searches i did...

An aircraft which is motionless and the sound waves produced...

(IMG:http://www.digitalillusions.ca/applewoodscience/LessonsOnLiine/Physics/doppler/doppler1.gif)

Here is an illustration of an aircraft in motion below the speed of sound, and the sound waves which can be heard in front of and behind the aircraft....

(IMG:http://www.digitalillusions.ca/applewoodscience/LessonsOnLiine/Physics/doppler/doppler2.gif)

Now an aircraft which is approaching the speed of sound and the sound waves produced.

(IMG:http://www.digitalillusions.ca/applewoodscience/LessonsOnLiine/Physics/doppler/doppler4.gif)

Clearly those in front of the above aircraft will not hear it coming.

Now an illustration of an aircraft which has exceeded the speed of sound.

(IMG:http://www.digitalillusions.ca/applewoodscience/LessonsOnLiine/Physics/doppler/doppler5.gif)

What does this mean? The faster an aircraft travels through air has a direct relationship to the distance a forward listener is able to hear and detect an approaching aircraft.

Those familiar with Doppler Effect will be able to understand the above a bit easier. But by no means is the above difficult to understand for any layman willing to learn.

[tit2]

Quote of rob balsamo :

“Here is an illustration of an aircraft in motion below the speed of sound, and the sound waves which can be heard in front of and behind the aircraft....”

Flight 77 is supposed to have hit the Pentagon at a speed of 781 feet per second, ie 238 meters per second. At this speed, at sea level, the engines of the Boeing 757 are used to their maximum capacity and I suppose that he results from it a very intense noise.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/descent_rate031308.html

The speed of sound is 343.2 meters per second (1,126 ft/s).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_sound

I read here that the speed of sound at sea level would be 340.29 meters per second.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=&q=spe...47&ie=UTF-8

The question I asked was aimed at understanding why April Gallop and the other witnesses listed in the “The use of explosives in connection with the attack on the Pentagon” had not heard the noise of approach of the Boeing 757. Normally these witnesses could hear the noise of the Boeing 757 approaching the pentagon, but the explanations given by "onesliceshort" and "amazed" allows perhaps to understand why they did not hear this noise.

[amazed!]

Thanks Rob, for those helpful diagrams.

tit2

Of course in the first place, nobody in the Pentagon heard the approaching airplane for the simple fact that there was no approaching airplane. Ours here is simply an academic exercise about a hypothetical situation.

This subject is very relevant, however, to the testimony presented by some fellow who was supposedly stuck in traffic near the Pentagon and heard (along with some woman in the car adjacent to his) the approaching airplane from behind. I say that is manufactured testimony all the way.