The North Side Flyover - Officially Documented, Independently Confirmed

Originally posted by jthomas
Now, are you going to provide the evidence we ask for or keep hiding?

Since the government isn't tasked with supplying their evidence, why should anyone have to supply it's suporters with anything?

You present your factual evidence first. After all, you're the one who believes the whole government and MSM laid out story. So, this evidence shouldn't be hard to find, right? But, we've gone through this before and you'll deny that the government has to supply anything but then cry that the "twoofers" have to supply evidence.

As Spock would say: "That is illogical, Captain."

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
I find it highly unlikely, if not impossible that a 757's wings would fold up and sail through an impact hole that's just too small to make this scenario plausible.

It's always instructive that we have to remind you that the wings were destroyed and the impact hole was quite wide enough.

Everything was completely destroyed? Nothing but confetti? Then you forgot one more quote:

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
The symmetrical 12-foot hole in the outer 'C' ring is also highly unlikely, as no part of a 757 is capable of punching through six limestone, brick, concrete and steel-reinforced walls, especially when it's claimed that most of the plane disintegrated.

Wow Griff
Sorry bud but the CIT Pentagon Team is making EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS.
They have yet to prove ANYTHING!
Hey Griff how is it going with getting that CIT rock solid, smoking gun evidence of MASS MURDER to a court?

Originally posted by discombobulatorBut on the point of the light poles, are you aware the Sgt. Chadwick Brooks said in late 2001 that he would never forget seeing the plane "literally just hitting the lamp poles"?

So did Lagasse, and later said he just inferred that it happened. Chadwick says he didn't see it hit also.



On a somewhat unrelated note, who is the "we" he is referring to in that picture? Lagasse? Don't they say later on that they never discussed the details together?

Looks like the debunkodroids are arriving in force. Perhaps one more quote is in order:

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
CIT may well be on to something significant, which is why every debunker in the book is being thrown at them. I've always thought the more debunking something receives, the greater likelihood it's true.

reply to post by jthomas


1. Obviously I missed where I have been arguing with anyone in this thread? That is what I ment about not playing this game of yours.

2. There are plenty of "truthers" who play this game also.

3. From what I've read, CIT is on to something and at least they are out there doing the grunt work. Even if they are mistaken, they've earned my respect to not degrade them or play you guys' childish games of trying to wreck their reputation. I have never seen Craig stoop to the level of some of his opponents and I also respect that. He has more reserve than I, that is for sure.

4. Have you spoken with all these eyewitnesses you claim? If not, when will you get off your ass and get them? You first. I'm not the one adamently claiming to know everything.

Originally posted by TheBobert
Hey Griff how is it going with getting that CIT rock solid, smoking gun evidence of MASS MURDER to a court?

I don't know. Ask Craig.

Let me ask. Who specifically does CIT name in this mass murder plot? Or do you mean that it should be "CIT vs. the government"? If I've missed where they name a culprit, I apologize.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by TheBobert
Hey Griff how is it going with getting that CIT rock solid, smoking gun evidence of MASS MURDER to a court?

I don't know. Ask Craig.

Let me ask. Who specifically does CIT name in this mass murder plot? Or do you mean that it should be "CIT vs. the government"? If I've missed where they name a culprit, I apologize.

Mike Walter
Aldo: “You want me to cut to the chase?” Marquis interrupts. “He’s an operative. One hundred percent, without a doubt. A deep-cover operative or asset.”

Lloyd England
His account is beyond implausible but in light of the testimony from the witnesses who were at the CITGO station placing the plane on the north side it has been shown that Lloyd's account is a complete fabrication . There is no chance a plane on the north side of the CITGO station could have hit light pole #1. This means that Lloyd England has now been shown beyond a reasonable doubt to have been directly involved with this black operation of mass murder. The importance of this information is critical to uncovering the crimes of 9/11. Lloyd is not to blame for an operation of this size and magnitude but he is most definitely a direct link to the perpetrators.

Vin Naranayan, Joel Sucherman, Kell Knowles, Keith Wheelhouse
Because there WAS NO 2nd plane and planted reports of one were meant to confuse people who really saw the plane fly over the building.

I'm sure they can start with these guys they've already named as co-conspirators.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by discombobulator]

[edit on 16-8-2008 by discombobulator]

reply to post by discombobulator


This is too rich. Already CIT is claiming it was a "hit piece". What's notable is as of this posting, nobody seems to care at LCF either. Poor Aldo (like a few in this thread) is responding to his own comments.

Pentacon - The Explorer's, Director's, Researcher's, Hit - Piece addition. Now with extra comedy!

I mean this sincerely, do 9-11 CT’ers ever, EVER dismiss the absolutely absurd? Or, is one unfounded CT supported by yet another unfounded CT, supported by yet another CT, supported by yet another CT………..


On last thought: CIT is going to have their "investigation" shut down by a massive libel suit for the kinds of statements listed above. When this happens, they will claim “they” were behind it. What’s more sad than that? The number of people who will believe them.

You just can't make this kind of comedy gold up.


[edit on 16-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

Originally posted by TheBobert
Hey Griff how is it going with getting that CIT rock solid, smoking gun evidence of MASS MURDER to a court?

How is it with you trying to find any piece of evidence that would support the official story in court?

I would love to know what you believers would do if me or someone did go to court and win outr case (specially with government documents that would hold up in court) what would you believers have to turn to to believe in next? I mean since you would have to stop living in the fantasy world you are in now.


[edit on 16-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
You just can't make this kind of comedy gold up.

Whats even better comedy is how beleivers can still believe in the official story with no evidence to support it and evidence coming out that questions it.

reply to post by ULTIMA1

I would love to know what you believers would do if me or someone did go to court and win outr case (specially with government documents that would hold up in court) what would you believers have to turn to to believe in next? I mean since you would have to stop living in the fantasy world you are in now.

Then do so. Stop wasting almost seven years of "investigation" time and get to it. Prove us all wrong. Show the world your smoking guns!

Surely your fellow NSA analysts (members of the NWO and therefore officially ‘them’) can point you in the direction of a sympathetic Federal Prosecutor?

Oh, I forgot, their “in on it” too.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

I've read the kudos and the info, I've seen other data that claims certain things happened, and certain things didn't... and as someone who has worked for 4 airlines, a charter company, and has been a pilot and partner of a small plane off and on for 19 years... I say this:
I've met and talked to many pilots who've told me some "amazing" things over a beer in MIA or MLB or APF or EYW or MHT or BDL... guys that drove things up to L-1011's or DC-10's... two were riding around in 737's... what matters is that these folks and I are not people who don't know the difference between a flying scion "t" or "x"... (i.e. 1977 Monte Carlo and Buick Regal) I'm good for identifying just about anything in the air, until I look at the homebuilts or ultralights that do things my Arrow would never be able to match with its' 1970's tech. I'll say this... do some homework and look at the Airliners Magazine regarding KAL 007(Korean AirLines) and the "ferretting" that occured with the Ruskies... just because some guy was flying A-10s doesn't mean he knew the F-117 existed at the time.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Whats even better comedy is how beleivers can still believe in the official story with no evidence to support it

Really? So all those pictures, eyewitness testimonies, expert testimonies, videos, physical evidence, common sense etc don't really exist? Thats quite a bold statement.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by Cool Hand Luke]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I would love to know what you believers would do if me or someone did go to court and win outr case (specially with government documents that would hold up in court) what would you believers have to turn to to believe in next? I mean since you would have to stop living in the fantasy world you are in now.

Then for the love of God please DO IT and let's FIND OUT.

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Oh, I forgot, their “in on it” too.

You know its really very sad and immature how you believers have such a 1 track mind. You keep demanding evidnece from others but can never provide any.

I still want to know what you will beleive in when the official 9/11 media story is proven wrong?

I am still waiting for any beleivers to post any actual evidnece that supports the official story, i guess i will have to go back to offering a reward. I have already posted a $1,000 reward years ago and someone else once offered a $2,000 reward and no one even tried.

Originally posted by discombobulator
Then for the love of God please DO IT and let's FIND OUT.

Stop with the nonsense. We all know what would happen -- the same thing that happened when Bob Dole's former chief of staff tried:

Stanley Hilton's 9/11 Suit Dismissed

The $7 billion federal class action lawsuit against top Bush Administration officials for, among other things, their roles in engineering and orchestrating the 911 attacks has been dismissed by Judge Illston. Attorney for the plaintiffs, Stanley Hilton is preparing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and hopes to reverse the judge's ruling.

Mr. Hilton will be making the fifteen page ruling dismissing the suit available to the public.

The judge's ruling was based on the "Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity". In other words, the suit was not dismissed because of lack of evidence, but rather because the judge reasoned that U.S. Citizens do not have the right to hold a sitting President accountable for anything, even if the charges include premeditated mass murder and premeditated acts of high treason.

What a surprise. Sovereign King George is immune. Probably should've figured that out right around the time Dubya started referring to the Constitution as a "goddam piece of paper."

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Not to be a nitpicker or anything but could you please provide a link to that article? Thank you

Multiple line post

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I would love to know what you believers would do if me or someone did go to court and win outr case (specially with government documents that would hold up in court) what would you believers have to turn to to believe in next? I mean since you would have to stop living in the fantasy world you are in now.

I'll bite.

What is this Government document you keep referring to that would supposedly support your case?

Can you enlighten me, and perhaps produce it please?

Originally posted by PplVSNWO
reply to post by ULTIMA1

 

Not only that, but the FDR says the plane was too high to have hit the light poles or Pentagon.

So it flew over the Pentagon?

See the thread on Flight 77 FDR research for more details. So the eye witnesses place the attack craft NoC and the FDR place it too high to have struck, why do we need a thousand more flyover witnesses?

You don't have any eyewitnesses that saw any plane fly away from the Pentagon nor do you have any "flyaway" flight path. Why not?

WHEN will you provide us those eyewitnesses, PplVSNWO?