All Forums | General Discussion

September 11, 2001 (long read)

...

Participants:

Posts: 1555

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:24 PM ET #1451

Madelyn Zakhem is a very long explanation. I remember this account very specifically and have documented the case on another forum we use. I will explain the best I could, sorry that it's so long, but if you want an answer, Kap, here it is. This post will be in 2 parts. Here's the first.

Madelyn Zakhem - On our first trip to Arlington with the very deceptive former alleged "truther" Russell Pickering we visited the VDOT in the attempt of interviewing her and others . Her original previously published account is as follows:

"The hijacked plane was coming up Columbia Pike, unbelievably low. It exploded into the Pentagon seconds after nearly skimming the rooftop of the Smart Traffic Center.

Madelyn Zakhem, executive secretary at the STC, had just stepped outside for a break and was seated on a bench when she heard what she thought was a jet fighter directly overhead. It wasn't. It was an airliner coming straight up Columbia Pike at tree-top level. "It was huge! It was silver. It was low -- unbelievable! I could see the cockpit. I fell to the ground.... I was crying and scared," Zakhem recalls.

"If I had been on top of our building, I would have been close enough to reach up and catch it," Madelyn Zakhem, an executive secretary in the Smart Traffic Center (STC) in Arlington, said two days after the terrorist plane rocketed directly over her. "

When we went there to interview her she said we had to get permission from the VDOT PR dept to be able to film her at the VDOT, so we walked outside onto the lawn area she claims she was standing at and conducted an impromptu off camera interview. She came off as very standoffish. She stood there with her arms crossed and was not very verbal in her description. It was like we had to pull details out of her. We stood out here on the VDOT lawn and interviewed her. Pictures of the VDOT lawn - image 1, image 2

(continued in next post)

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:31 PM ET #1452

(continued from post #1454)

She maintained her story about the plane coming over the VDOT/STC(Smart Traffic Center), only she described it as inches above the roof of the brick building with the right wing hanging over, at least that is how Russell Pickering decided to interpret it. Here is a picture of what she described, taken on-location.

As we stood there, we knew the north of the Citgo flight path as cited by Lagasse was still a possibility so we asked her when it came up Columbia Pike was it 1). closer to the Sheraton, 2) closer to the white house next to the brick building, or 3)closer to (coming from) 395 in an attempt to determine the direction. Here is a view of the 3 angles we mentioned. Remember, this is exactly where Madelyn stood.

When we did that, she indicated a path more in line with the plane coming from the direction of 395 and heading toward north of the Citgo (number 3), as indicted by this image

So it seems that when pressed, Madlene knew the plane headed in that general direction and subtly abandoned her already vague and ambiguous SoC claim.

We remember standing there and pointing off in these 3 different directions to determine which direction Madlene claims the plane flew in. She agreed with the one that seemed to take it NoC. In retrospect, it seems as if she tried to blend her story with what actually happened...the plane flying over the Annex and toward NoC. Simply because she didn't know if we had determined this already and perhaps didn't want to seem completely dishonest.

Regardless, there are some serious problems with Madlene's account...

(continued in next post)

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:36 PM ET #1453

(continued from post #1455)

1. We have corroborated eyewitnesses statements that place the plane flying over Ed Paik's shop, over the Navy Annex, and north of the Citgo. The plane would essentially have been across the street from her and nowhere near over her.

2. As you can see from the blue Official SoC flight path line in this graphic, the plane didn't even fly over the Smart Traffic Center OR Madelyn according to the official data from the FDR and the official story. So her story doesn't even match with the gov't's and the physical damage path.

3. She claims she saw the cockpit and a wing. But in reality she very clearly admitted that:

" I fell to the ground.... I was crying and scared."

This would be an indicator that she wouldn't have and couldn't have seen what she claims she saw in the official story's split second flyover of the VDOT/STC @ 535 MPH.

(continued in next post)

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:39 PM ET #1454

(continued from post #1456)

4. More importantly, on 9/11 her view would have been obstructed by the low hanging trees that covered the front of the VDOT lawn, which weren't there the day we interviewed her...

No Trees in August 2006, as viewed here.

No Trees from Sheraton, as viewed here.

Trees on lawn at Madelyn's location on 9/11, as viewed here.

Trees from Madelyn's viewpoint, on 9/11, as viewed here.

Clearly from her response she was somewhat standoffish and somewhat uncooperative/evasive again. But thankfully, she came clean about Russell's accusations. Perhaps Russell thought we wouldn't follow up on this claim.

(continued in next post. The 7800 character limit really blows, btw)

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:40 PM ET #1455

(continued from post #1457)

When we returned in November '06. Craig and I went through the motions and scheduled a tour of the VDOT and even attempted to schedule an on camera interview with Madlene through the PR department. Videos here:

https://thepentacon.com/Topic4.htm

Madlene said she would give us an interview as long as we had the approval. Once we obtained that approval; she backed out.You can hear Ryan the PR rep giving the tour actually having to explain Madlene's alleged flight path. When Craig realized we weren't getting her on camera, he asked Ryan to get her to draw the flight path and where she was standing. Instead she simply noted where she was standing with a dot. Clearly she was again being evasive about documenting this flight path.

The question is why?

Is Madlene merely an opportunist who wanted attention for what she claimed was a traumatic event?

Was Madlene drastically mistaken? Unlikely.

Or is Madlene an operative or asset of some sort?

I have pointed out her Jewish sounding last name and possible Israeli accent and the fact that I noticed she was wearing a crucifix as a curious oddity. Is there a possibility she is Mossad? Perhaps.

But one thing is for sure. She certainly was not telling the truth about what she saw on 9/11.

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:46 PM ET #1456

Stephen McGraw - Our interview with Stephen is here. We have noticed an INCREDIBLY obvious difference in body language between the highly publicized mainstream media witnesses we have interviewed as compared to the previously unknown ones we found from canvassing.

Regular people are open, relaxed, and visibly emotionally affected by their experience on 9/11. The others are cold, removed, fidgety, analytical, defensive, and monotone.

But the facts speak for themselves.

Not only does it strain credulity that McGraw didn't know he was next to the Pentagon.......McGraw states that he got out of his car with his holy water and stole immediately after the attack (within 45 seconds) to administer prayer to the wounded and dying on the scene.

There are two issues with this claim. Navy Times reporter Mark Faram says he witnessed McGraw cross the guardrail with his holy water and stole in "one fluid motion" but he didn't arrive to the scene until 10 minutes later!

If Faram is right this is strong evidence that McGraw was NOT on that highway at the time of the attack and was added to the scene minutes later.

Another important detail not included in the short.....McGraw claims he was late to preside over a funeral at Arlington Cemetery. Why would he get out of his car at all with such an important commitment? We know for a fact that funerals continued as scheduled at ANC.

This is why we choose to dis-include McGraw's interview and claims from the NSA video, Kap.

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 7:53 PM ET #1457

Steve Riskus - Riskus actually supports a north side approach. I have no idea where you got that he supports a South side approach, Kaponofor.

He was traveling southbound on 27 (the Lloyde side) and his view of the approach over the Navy Annex and Citgo was blocked by trees so he didn't see the plane until it passed in front of him over the highway but the distance he describes it from him supports the north side.

The Opus Dei inspired priest/former DoJ attorney Stephen McGraw claims he was stuck in traffic northbound.

All evidence indicates that they blocked southbound traffic soon AFTER the explosion.

Riskus never saw the cab at all let alone it spin out in front of him with a 40 foot pole sticking out of it. We feel the cab scene was likely not staged until after they blocked traffic.

Yes we got a hold of Riskus but he would not agree to an interview.

Dawn Vignola - Dawn Vignola was the second person reported as a witness to the Pentagon attack on WUSA channel 9 during a phone interview in the first minutes after the attack. The broadcast can be heard here. We spoke with Dawn in 2007 and were allowed into her home to document her point of view on 9/11 from her 16th floor apartment. She declined to grant us an interview. I'm not sure where you got your information about Dawn speaking to CIT, but she did not.

Lloyd England - I already talked about Lloyd's claims in posts 1443, 1444, 1445, and 1446. Clearly, you didn't take the time to read them.

As you can see Kaponofor, I know my shit. I've done the research. I've spoken with these people personally. Don't do a stupid internet search and try to "debunk" me or CIT. Watch my videos and formulate your own opinion, or stay the fuck out of here.

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 8:04 PM ET #1458

tillyo, did I just "pwn" Kaponofor? Because I just re-read my posts, and it appears that I may have. I need your professional opinion though?

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 10, 2010 - 8:10 PM ET #1459

Quote Originally Posted by gfinger:

Oh poor smdio. Still looking for answers about your dead dad. Pretty sad. Listen up man. I have an actual video proof of a plane hitting the Pentagon. Never been released before video that it is. It's actually not mine, but I know the person who has it. You pay me enough, I will show it to ya. Others have paid and have seen it. It has to be watched live in his holding so no one can duplicate it or ruin it. If not, stop searching for answers and let it go. Perhaps your dad died for a reason that day.

I'll need a price and a place which I can bring a team of my friends. Can you be a bit more specific in PM with me? I'm very interested and very serious.

If the video does not show a plane flying into the Pentagon, we will not pay a single dollar. I'll also want you to agree to pay for our flight and transportation costs by signing a legally binding contract, should the video be fake, video-shopped, or not show an actual plane hitting the Pentagon.

Pardon my skepticism, but I believe if you or anyone else had this type of video 1.) The government would have taken it from you a long, long time ago or 2.) You would have sold it to CNN, CBS, MSNBC, or another big-time media organization for top dollar.

But please do PM me. Again, I'm extremely interested and extremely serious.

tillyo

Prospect

Joined: Nov, 2010

Posts: 154

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 12:29 AM ET #1460

I just skimmed through your boring post smiddyo and yo are boring and repeat things alot. You dont own anyone you are a liar and dont realize people are just keeping this going to mess with you. Myself included the good news you seem to have a ton of free time so keep going.

paul_scholes

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1003

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 1:13 AM ET #1461

There are similarities between 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. I think if you have an IQ above 120 or so you know what's going on. We're fucking around in Iraq and Afghanistan doing God knows what because of this shit. If you don't think large corporations are running the world then I have a bridge to sell you. The United States economy is on steroids and the United States government is far too compartmentalized to ever change. Get out of this country while you still can, move to Thailand, play soccer and muay thai all day, pay 1/10 for rent, and fuck Asian chicks until you die.

boberts427

Veteran

Joined: Mar, 2008

Posts: 4934

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 1:21 AM ET #1462

paul

paul_scholes

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1003

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 1:23 AM ET #1463

And I'm sorry if WTC7 isn't a smoking gun to any one then YOU MY FRIEND ARE RETARDED.

smdio

Veteran

Joined: Oct, 2010

Posts: 1094

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 12:28 PM ET #1464

Nice post Paul

It appears that I've scared everyone away with my most recent posts. There's not a single person in here that can tell me that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon after watching the videos I've posted

swahili

Rookie

Joined: Sep, 2000

Posts: 771

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 12:39 PM ET #1465

Quote Originally Posted by paul_scholes:

There are similarities between 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. I think if you have an IQ above 120 or so you know what's going on. We're fucking around in Iraq and Afghanistan doing God knows what because of this shit. If you don't think large corporations are running the world then I have a bridge to sell you. The United States economy is on steroids and the United States government is far too compartmentalized to ever change. Get out of this country while you still can, move to Thailand, play soccer and muay thai all day, pay 1/10 for rent, and fuck Asian chicks until you die.

you forgot to put underage before Asian

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:33 PM ET #1466

"I have pointed out her Jewish sounding last name and possible Israeli accent and the fact that I noticed she was wearing a crucifix as a curious oddity. Is there a possibility she is Mossad? Perhaps.

But one thing is for sure. She certainly was not telling the truth about what she saw on 9/11."

Shame on you, smdio.

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:36 PM ET #1467

"This is why we choose to dis-include McGraw's interview and claims from the NSA video, Kap."

My point smdio is that you really can't call yourselves unbiased investigators if you willingly choose -- for credibility reasons -- to leave out certain witness. Real legitimate investigators would include ALL the evidence and allow the viewer to determine issues of credibility. That is, unless you have a preconceived conclusion you want the viewer to reach...

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:39 PM ET #1468

Quote Originally Posted by smdio:

Nice post Paul

It appears that I've scared everyone away with my most recent posts. There's not a single person in here that can tell me that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon after watching the videos I've posted

The motion reasonable explanation is that a plane hit the Pentagon. The fact that you have to go to the lengths of arguing that parts of the AA plane were photoshopped in -- something that would be easily demonstrated and discovered by someone with rudimentary photoshopped skills (and would like leave electronic footprints within the images properties themselves) -- makes me think that you really aren't considering all the evidence, but rather instead just the evidence that supports your theory.

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:42 PM ET #1469

BTW smdio -- are you not Aldo Marquis? Because you directly lifted your explanation to my concerns from a post by him without any attribution.

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:48 PM ET #1470

Also smdio, I seem to have a problem with the fundamental problem that you completely discredit eyewitness testimony that doesn't support your theory yet your entire theory itself appears to rely on eyewitness testimony completely.

kaponofor3

Legend

Joined: Nov, 2007

Posts: 35430

Posted: Dec. 11, 2010 - 3:49 PM ET #1471

From another site:

"The film tries to make the case that four eyewitness statements are enough evidence to counter all other physical evidence (and implicitly, all other contradictory eyewitness statements).One of the main defects of the PentaCon is that it only considers four eyewitness statements—ignoring a very large body of eyewitness statements and previous research into the testimony.[4]

Why is this significant?“Citing only evidence that is favorable to one side as if no contrary evidence exists is known as SPECIAL PLEADING.”[5]

“Special Pleading is a fallacy in which a person applies standards, principles, rules, etc. to others while taking herself (or those she has a special interest in) to be exempt, without providing adequate justification for the exemption. This sort of "reasoning" has the following form:

Person A accepts standard(s) S and applies them to others in circumtance(s) C.
Person A is in circumstance(s) C.
Therefore A is exempt from S.”[6]

Typically, special pleading is used in studies of the Pentagon Eyewitness testimony to claim that a few statements are more relevant or important than the rest of the eyewitness testimony combined.Special pleading is not only used to ignore other evidence; it can be used to take certain portions of one statement from a witness as being true, while ignoring all contradictory evidence by the same and other witnesses.The most famous example of this practice is seen in this Pentagon eyewitness quotation taken out of context:"