Posted on 11/16/2001 1:09:50 PM PST by smorgle
'I Know What I Saw...That Was No Mechanical Problem...No Way!' By Peter Gelzinis BostonHerald.com 11-13-1 ROCKAWAY BEACH, NY -"I will never believe it was an accident. They'll never convince me of that." Eugene Sanfilippo kept looking past the microphones and notebooks, down 131st Street toward Jamaica Bay and a vision that the rest of us could not see. It was past three in the afternoon, the sky above this sliver of Queens was clear, but all this lanky, 45-year-old bus mechanic could see was a huge orange ball of flame; he could still feel the unbearable heat; he could hear people screaming; he could taste the acrid black smoke. And he was still afraid. "When I heard the explosion, I thought we were under attack," Sanfilippo said. "My first impression was that they'd hit us with a nuclear bomb. I figured it was just like the World Trade Center. And I watched that burn from the (Jamaica) bay." Miles away from where Eugene Sanfilippo stood, at the edge of a new Ground Zero, a mayor, a president's spokesman and a slew of FAA officials were urging us to think "accident." But they were not standing in Rockaway Beach. They did not lose neighbors and friends across the bay in Manhattan on Sept. 11. Black crepe still hangs here, along with the memories of funerals for roughly 80 cops, firefighters and stockbrokers. To look into Eugene Sanfilippo's eyes was to see there were no coincidences. "Every day," he said, "I fear more and more for the safety of my family. Why should we be made to suffer this way?" Tommy Rayder, who works at JFK Airport, kept looking past the fire barricades, toward a place where the autumn leaves had been burnt off the trees. The homes that were gone belonged to neighbors Tommy knew, "because in this part of the city, we all know everybody." "I want to believe it was mechanical. I'm hoping it was an accident. These days," Tommy Rayder sighed, "an accident is what you pray for. "That's a weird thing to say isn't it? Here, a jet plane comes down in the middle of a neighborhood, and you pray it's an accident because you can't bear to think they'd do it again to us. "Not here, not in Rockaway. You figure it couldn't happen again cause we already suffered enough." Standing a few feet away, James Gill tried as best he could to comfort his wife who appeared to be deep in the throes of this new suffering. "We are up on the Cross Bay Bridge," James Gill said, "driving over from Richmond Hill to look at a house. "My wife saw the whole thing. What she saw was an explosion, way forward on the engines, sort of just behind the cockpit. "I had to pull over, just there on the bridge. Amanda was hysterical. She dialed 911 on the cell phone, and just started to scream, `Help me! Help me!' " After being rocked by the sound of an initial explosion, James Gill said he looked up to see American Flight 587 in flames and attempting to bank, only to wind up in a flat death spiral. "I was in munitions in both the Army and also the Navy. I know what I heard and what I saw. That was no mechanical problem. No way!" Howard Greenberg rushed home from his law office in Manhattan to find his wife shell-shocked. After seeing the plane fall, and believing it was going to kill both her and her children, Howard Greenberg said his wife spent the next few horrific hours running over body parts in the direction of her neighbors' burning homes. She was carrying blankets and water. "I'm afraid," Howard Greenberg said, "that my wife believes this is another incident. She'd probably tell you that herself if she was able to talk. I'm afraid that's impossible. "Personally I might like to believe that it was something else, but when you've been told that this whole area is being considered as a crime scene, and that FBI agents are looking in your yard and on your roof for evidence, for pieces of jet wreckage or human beings, then it becomes hard to make a case for coincidence. "Now that all may change, but right now this is simply too much to fathom." After being told to vacate her home, Lilly Reynolds looked into the faces of the strangers swarmed around her. "You know, after so many of our neighbors and friends died in September we were just getting back to some idea of normal, then this happens. "My God, you say, they've done it again. What else are we supposed to think?"
It has nothing to do with defense lawyers, or lying witnesses. It is just a fact that people are typically poor observors, and also have a hard time in retrospect, differentiating between a remembered perception and a created one.
You can like it or you don't have to. But that's the empirical truth, and reality doesn't actually give a sh*t what you prefer. Sorry.
And I don't give a sh*t about your theories of reality. Eyewitness testimony cannot be totally or even partially discounted a priori because of some bogus general "study" you allude to (got a cite?). It has been and will continue to be essential evidence in any civil or criminal investigation, whether you like it or not.
The US federal government long ago learned to lie and cover up and fabricate.
That they did. Still I think there's a lot of stuff going on here at once, not just sheeple-ness. Here's the breakdown as I see it:
people who will believe in a conspiracy on principle
people who really are asleep to the government's manipulations and deceits, real and potential
people who are awake but tired of knee-jerk conspiracists
people who are awake but for whatever reason lean toward 'accident'/don't suspect the government of covering up in this particular case
people who are awake but believe the government, by allowing for both accident and sabotage (not saying it's sabotage but not grounding Airbuses either), is acting to protect the aviation industry/economy/political considerations/international relations
people who are awake and willing to consider all reasonable possibilities without preference for accident or sabotage but eventually want an answer one way or the other
I am awake (I think) but don't chalk every strange thing up to government lies. Sometimes they're just dumb as rocks. For instance they were saying at first that maybe an engine knocked the tail off--this when it was already known the tail was back in the water while both engines were in Rockaway. What genius came up with that one?
Overall I think the government is lying to us about a lot of stuff, and a lot of people are asleep to that, but it's too soon to give up on this particular case.
Too funny!
It's certainly understandable that the govt. and the airlines don't want to jump to the conclusion that this was a terrorist act. First of all, there's no evidence yet that points that way, and it would be irresponsible to say it was likely a terrorist act if the facts don't support that. Secondly, it would be a tremendous embarrassment and PR disaster for the govt. and the airlines if it were to be ruled an act of terrorism -- they would have a lot to answer for if such a thing could happen after the supposed improvements in security. Third, the economic impact on the airlines would be horrendous if people lose faith (any more than they already have) in the ability of the airlines to secure the aircraft against acts of terrorism.
We don't yet know what happened, but a conclusion that the crash was the result of terrorist activity is one that will be reached very reluctantly indeed.
http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGATP04RYTC.html
The people who saw the missile before any explosion are the only ones who really know what happened before the first explosion. People who didn't see a missile or saw other streaks of light are being honest, but the're *later* witnesses to the complete chain of events.
The article is here.
Articles about the World Press Photo 2000 contest are on the web, if you want to see them. Sorry I couldn't post a link - Netscape is really balking. Anyway, take a look sometime in the center (articles) section -you'd be amazed.
Homer say spontaneous center fuel tank explosion. MMMMmmm good.
If you know what is happening now with air travel now, you're well aware of the motive (for a lying leader like Clinton) in bringing in the CIA, issuing emergency executive orders, arresting whistleblowers etc as he did. It's devastating to the economy if people don't feel safe flying out of NYC. The eyewitnesses meanwhile have to go against the grain for the sake of truth. In this case I'm confident we'll get the real truth since Bush isn't afraid of having a tough job with terrorists or the economy.
Funny how no one is constructing websites or videos trying to "clarify" how there was never a second plane to hit the Trade Towers. Why? Because when we're all eyewitnesses we can't be lied to or told it never happened. So don't dismiss your fellow average Americans so lightly in favor of "expert analysis."
Horowitz, you gubermint lackey.
Who reads this paper...what a bunch of garbage.
What truths support the contention that it couldn't have been mechanical? Couldn't the explosion have been the result of mechanical failure(s)?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.