Pentagon Plane Witness Roundup
So I listened to about ten of the witnesses interviewed by Jeff Hill here. Despite, all the oddity of Jeff Hill getting to talk to all these people, and that many if not all, are probably agents, the calls are still remarkable. If they are agents, they are great actors. Penny Elgas, for instance, was surprisingly believable and fun to listen to.
If any of them are honest, they were either fooled by a fly-over, or ... a large passenger plane indeed hit the Pentagon.
But SOME of the specific problems with the official Pentagon hit story are as follows:
1) There are too many conflicts on plane approach path, flat versus dive, north of the CITGO station, over the station, or south of the station. North of CITGO seems to be common-- and north of CITGO gives an almost impossible flight path for the official story.
2) There are major conflicts about the timing of the "C-130"/second plane. Were there two 757-like planes? Are people just mistaken or are they lying?
3) A large number of problems with the entry hole and associated physical damage to the building.
4) The dearth of plane debris-- which is even verified by many in the phone calls with Hill
5) The impossibility of the official plane speed and approach for the official pilot, Hani Hanjour.
6) The Lloyd England story is EXTREMELY suspicious, and to anyone with an open mind, signals a hoax.
Frankly, I was learning towards a plane hitting the Pentagon after hearing the witnesses talk with Hill-- it's hard not to be taken in by their apparent sincerity. But this changed after I saw the complete Lloyde England story. His story really makes me think there was a concerted effort to promote a plane hit from the official path -- while there was a fly-over on the north side. In this case, the honest eye-witnesses could well have been fooled-- similar to the WTC.
Another possibility, which is easier to reconcile with witnesses who saw the plane disappear is some sort of high-tech trick plane that can turn close to invisible in a split second. This would be more easy to trick the witnesses, and could have been used at the WTC as well.
If any of them are honest, they were either fooled by a fly-over, or ... a large passenger plane indeed hit the Pentagon.
But SOME of the specific problems with the official Pentagon hit story are as follows:
1) There are too many conflicts on plane approach path, flat versus dive, north of the CITGO station, over the station, or south of the station. North of CITGO seems to be common-- and north of CITGO gives an almost impossible flight path for the official story.
2) There are major conflicts about the timing of the "C-130"/second plane. Were there two 757-like planes? Are people just mistaken or are they lying?
3) A large number of problems with the entry hole and associated physical damage to the building.
4) The dearth of plane debris-- which is even verified by many in the phone calls with Hill
5) The impossibility of the official plane speed and approach for the official pilot, Hani Hanjour.
6) The Lloyd England story is EXTREMELY suspicious, and to anyone with an open mind, signals a hoax.
Frankly, I was learning towards a plane hitting the Pentagon after hearing the witnesses talk with Hill-- it's hard not to be taken in by their apparent sincerity. But this changed after I saw the complete Lloyde England story. His story really makes me think there was a concerted effort to promote a plane hit from the official path -- while there was a fly-over on the north side. In this case, the honest eye-witnesses could well have been fooled-- similar to the WTC.
Another possibility, which is easier to reconcile with witnesses who saw the plane disappear is some sort of high-tech trick plane that can turn close to invisible in a split second. This would be more easy to trick the witnesses, and could have been used at the WTC as well.
posted by spooked at 9:07 AM
4 Comments:
it is obvious that a 757 did not crash into the pentagon as we were told
Jeff met any of these witnesses in person? Did he ask them where they were standing or find out anything about them?
All interviews were by phone. He did ask where they were standing and approach path questions to most of them.
Jeff Hill has a clear agenda to get attention by attacking CIT. Notice how he actually brings up CIT to the witnesses in a deliberate effort to bias them. He did not ask ANY investigative questions regarding the flight path to Penny Elgas (which was one of his first Pentagon interviews). Obviously the big question now is regarding the flight path but Hill practically ignores this. The plane can't cause any of the damage to the light poles or building from the north side. Hill is just blowing smoke. His whole "regular dumb guy" approach is transparent. In the very least he knows that he's dishonestly approaching this information for narcissistic reasons even if he is merely a useful idiot as opposed to a full-blown asset or cointel operative.
Post a Comment
<< Home