Go Back   Let's Roll Forums > Blogs
Connect with Facebook

  1. Old Comment

    the pentagon - what really really happened

    Hey 22205,
    It's all very interesting, and the truth is far from the OFT. You have done a great job on compiling the apparently contradictory testimonies of the direction of the plane's bank angle. There has to be a way to make sense of how so many close eyewitnesses saw two mutually exclusive scenarios.

    The NOC witnesses almost ALL reported a right bank. Maybe even all of them. But when you think about it, they were in positions where their view of the moment of impact, was obscured by trees, earth berms, elevated highway, cemetery bank, wall, fences, Navy Annex, overhead sign, etc.

    We should do a map of witness locations relative to their claims of left and right bank. I think that would be helpful.

    Re the rapid switch from a right bank to a left bank, well that is just not something a 757 is capable of. When a plane banks right, it is turning right and vice versa. So if the plane switched from right to left bank just before overflying the building, it would be turning left, and would not fly over South Parking, but towards North Parking.

    But both Michael Kelly and Don Scott were on I-395 heading east when they saw the plane (a) flying across him near 14th St Bridge before the explosion, and (b) turning hard right from north of the Pentagon, before the explosion.

    They were both therefore flyover witnesses.

    David Ball was another flyover witness on I-395 who actually talked about it as such, and he was murdered.

    There is no way - as they imagined in their confusion - that the plane could have turned back from where Kelly and Scott both saw it, to then hit the building. But that is what their minds were tricked into believing had happened.

    Just as Roosevelt Roberts and DeWitt Roseborough were deceived. Also Dennis Smith who saw the plane's tail from the courtyard, before he heard the explosion.

    I agree with you about there being a delay between flyover and explosion, but I think it was even longer. And I believe this can even be seen on one of the Gatecam videos, where there is a ghostly image of a 757 banking right, above the height of the Pentagon, in 2 frames, before the 'plane' is seen flying across the lawn. Those images are posted on my Lloyde England Vindicated thread. The ghostly image is the identical shape to the plane that was photoshopped in. Maybe a whistleblower left these faint images in the sky, hoping somebody would stumble on the truth.

    The plane was actually well over the building before the explosion occurred ... but there was ALSO a separate event that happened on the Helipad where the fire and the debris were.

    Just not Honegger's 'white plane destroyed on the helipad without hitting the wall' theory. She got close, but not close enough.

    And Jim Fetzer's idea that the debris must have been dumped on the Helipad by the C-130 also comes close to what happened, while missing the truth.

    The debris was caused by something separate from what made the impact hole. That much is self-evident, but so far, nobody else has even imagined what the mechanism could have been. Even though numerous witnesses saw it happen, and tried to explain this the best way they could. Hence the 'left bank', the plane 'hitting short', 'bouncing on the lawn,' 'cartwheeling,' and 'left wing hit the ground first' testimonies.

    Just look at Boger's and Kidd's cars on fire. Boger's car was well ablaze for many minutes before Kidd's Jeep even caught fire. Yet the Jeep was closer to the impact hole, therefore should have borne the brunt of the jet fuel and shielded Boger's car.

    It must have been the other way round, if a 757 had hit at the impact hole. The burning fuel from its left wing should have travelled right to left, not left to right. The Jeep ought to have erupted in flames first, if the 'jet fuel' fire originated from the impact hole direction.

    I am interested in the helicopter you mentioned, and the radar evidence. What do you know about this? It is a very significant element in the truth of what happened. It was one of the first things seen and testified to, yet it was successfully suppressed very quickly. Likewise, the radar data would have to have been falsified to cover up the role played by this chopper.

    It is impossible to find any genuine witness testimony about it, nobody has identified it by name. In fact, the testimony recorded by the historian quoted by Honegger, was manipulated. That helicopter was identified as a blue and white Huey, which is practically a kid's toy. You can imagine it with a smiley face on the front. There is no way this chopper was an unarmed Huey, no matter what any official report says.

    They tried hard to suppress its existence and its role in the military black operation. But the perps were unable to extinguish every source of evidence identifying it.

    The helicopter was a Marines Sikorsky CH-53 Super Stallion. These things are massive. 90 feet long, 22,500 horsepower, 30 ton payload, fitted with 3 machine guns and obviously can be rigged with whatever else would be required to help pull off the Copperfield Pentagon illusion. Such as mortar weaponry and a bellyful of 'debris' amounting to something that appeared to be the left wing of a plane, loaded with jet fuel ... preferably skinned in white composition, for lightness, such as was displayed by Penny Elgas and Aziz ElHallou.

    The presence of Marines CH-53s there at the Pentagon would have been commonplace. People expect military helicopters to fly near the Pentagon's Helipad. Onlookers would not think twice about it being there. It was obviously "one of ours" so would never be suspected of inflicting carnage on its own building and occupants. It would only be perceived as performing a protective role, not a hostile military attack on home ground.

    This helicopter was captured on many FOIA-release videos and 2 excellent photos. It was definitely there at the time, no matter what the radar data or any "official" testimony claims.

    The presence of this CH-53 explains many perplexing eye witness details, plus the debris field and fire on the Helipad. It explains the white composition fragments which never belonged to any aluminium 757 jet.

    It explains the several early (soon suppressed) eye witness testimonies about a plane hitting a helicopter on the Helipad, and about a helicopter 'exploding'.
    It explains how Lloyde England's cab was speared by a 12-foot x 4-inch pole when he was north of the Columbia Pike exit sign.
    It explains how a 757 engine-shaped scoop could have been cut out of the top of that tree on the bridge near Pole #1. A machine gun would do that very neatly.

    The CH-53's capabilities make the apparently impossible, not just possible, but accomplished fact.

    As for a helicopter 'chasing' the 757 away from the Pentagon, well how could that be? The jet flies 4 times faster than the chopper. That is less credible than the C-130 'shadowing' the jet pre-impact. But it was filmed and photographed flying away a few minutes post impact, for sure. It also circled around and came back again. Actually, the CH-53 photographed landing on the cloverleaf later, was probably a different one. The Marines have many of them.

    Anyway, I believe this line of investigation is the only one in all these years, which leads inexorably to the truth. The North-of-Citgo witness testimony is good, but obviously without this helicopter evidence, it never could progress to a valid conclusion. The NOC evidence gives a direction but not a mechanism enabling the solution.

    Regards,
    Ruby
    Posted 3 Jun 2019 at 20:31 PM by Ruby Gray Ruby Gray is online now

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 18:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Ad Management by RedTyger