C-130 video confirms 84th RADES Data

Originally posted by baffledon911
Well something isnt right here then, because on the screen shot taken from the telemundo live feed(so says this author of the pdf) shows a time stamp of 943am on the screen with a caption referring to the 77 crash.

I personally agree with Beachnuts AF rant reply to me regarding the E4b, I just wondered if the E4 might of witnessed or been sent to witness the crash much like the C130 was sent.

baffledon911
I also did a quick check on you tube and found the telemundo video, it does show the e4b at 943am over DC. So either telemundos time stamp was wrong(seems impossible but i guess anything is now days) or the E4 def did not take off at 943am.

My advice would be to believe your own eyes and your own common sense and logic and your own investigative skills and your own sense of what is the truth and not the lies of these 'government loyalists'.

Since the 84 RADES data was faked and released four years after 9-11 to prop up the failing Flight 77 FDR, it is immaterial what the RADES data might show or not show concerning the E-4B. It seems they would want to hide the fact that E-4Bs were up during 9-11 over New York and DC. With their electronic capabilities, they could easily jam all local radars and communications and command the entire 9-11 psyops operation.

Boone 870
Mirage, there are only 4 of these aircraft in existence. One of them took off from Wright Patterson Air Force Base after the Pentagon was hit. One of them took off from Andrews Air Force Base after the Pentagon was hit. One of them was hauling a general and his staff to Offutt Air Force Base.

That leaves only one left unaccounted for. Maybe just maybe, it could've been participating in Operation Northern Vigilance or sitting on the ground.

Or, it could've been flying around New York City at an altitude low enough for everyone to see, blowing the lid off of the entire conspiracy.

Originally posted by SPreston

My advice would be to believe your own eyes and your own common sense and logic and your own investigative skills and your own sense of what is the truth and not the lies of these 'government loyalists'.

My advice would be for you to stop whining, SPreston, and provide the eyewitnesses who, with their own eyes and common sense, would have seen an aircraft flying away from the Pentagon.

Everyone wants to know why you, CIT, and Pilots for 9/11 Truth can't provide crucial, common sense evidence for your claims.

Still afraid?

reply to post by SPreston


My, my, my! You keep posting this lie that the RADES data was faked, but you don't prove it with a diagram to connect what you believe is the true flight path of the C-130 with the recorded video and photographic evidence.

It seems very simple. We all know that you're a good graphic artist, yet you post crap and more crap when a simple diagram would prove your point.

Why do you keep posting crap while avoiding a simple diagram that would win you great honors? You don't want fortune and fame?

I find it difficult to believe that you keep reneging on your promise to post this graphic. Is there a reason for the delay? I can only think of one reason you might do do this. Know what that reason is, SPreston?

Reheat
You keep posting this lie that the RADES data was faked, but you don't prove it with a diagram to connect what you believe is the true flight path of the C-130 with the recorded video and photographic evidence.

I find it difficult to believe that you keep reneging on your promise to post this graphic. Is there a reason for the delay? I can only think of one reason you might do do this. Know what that reason is, SPreston?

Yet again another infamous Reheat 'strawman argument'? Would you mind quoting from this forum such a promise from me Reheat? No? Sorry Reheat, but counterfeiting other members' posts is not allowed on this forum. I know that the Magnificent Randi Forum of Illusionists is not quite so obstructionist in their rules and regulations, but you cannot collect a quote of mine from over there and post it here either. Besides, I have never posted over there at the Forum of Fools.

Where did you learn 'strawman arguments' Reheat? Was your Mommy always beating on you and you had to devise lies for your own protection? Has there ever been a time when you were just plain truthful? No? I know. A silly question to ask someone ignorant of the meaning of truth. Will you ever run out of 'strawman arguments' Reheat?



[edit on 8/20/08 by SPreston]

reply to post by SPreston


If you don't mind me asking.
I hear you talk about a decoy plane, but what is it? Why was it flown if it was really there? Was it there for people to see a plane and think it was the one that hit the pentagon?

If you could explain what you mean about the decoy plane, that would be great.

Reheat, all that vid shows is that there was a C-130 in the air at that time with the same trajectory, it means that there was a use of actual data, it does not mean that a plane hit the pentagon, not to mention the fact that the damge done to the pentagon and the surounding area does not match.
The only proof I have to show you is the fact that if you look around on this forum you will see lots of well documented things about the flight path and the damage done by whatever it was that hit the pentagon.

THere's lots of things that don't add up about 9/11, there are inconsistancies, the inconsistancies lead to a conspiracy, it's not because people are loons or crazies or nutters, it's because people see something that doesn't line up.

BTW, don't resort to calling me names, one of the first signs that someone is loosing and arguement is personal attacks and name calling.
You've been doing a lot of name calling, also defamation of character.

Try and keep on topic with what's going on and if you have proof, then you shouldn't be afraid of answering some questions asked by people you've ignored.

It's pretty simple and easy to have a calm non-flame throwing debate, but sadly people on both sides get crazy with it by name calling and personal attacks (usually started by the skeptics).

-Jimmy

Originally posted by beachnut
What is your point on the C-130, are you trying to make up some implied fantasy about the performance of a C-130 to aid the failing CIT efforts?

Bu asking about the C-130 i am just proving yet again that beleivers like you do not know what really happened that day and are just going by what you have been told.

Too bad you are still living in a media fedd fantasy world.

Stll waiting for a beiliever to come up with an explanation of why an E-4B was flying around DC during the attack.

I would really like it if someone would answer my question.
I'm really wanting to know what this decoy plane thing is about, it's something I've never heard of.

Thanks,

-Jimmy

reply to post by jimmyjackblack


Decoy plane is a term used by CIT (Citizen Investigation Team).

They believe that flight 77 flew over the Pentagon instead of impacting it and that the damage to the building was caused by explosives preplanted by the perpetrators.

reply to post by Boone 870


Thanks,

Hmm... THat could be, but it would make more sense to me if the decoy plane launched a missle, but according to the second security tape of the pentagon, nothing fly's over the pentagon, there's just an explosion (I'm talking about the second security tape, I think it's from a gas station parking lot).

-Jimmy

Originally posted by jimmyjackblack
Hmm... THat could be, but it would make more sense to me if the decoy plane launched a missle, but according to the second security tape of the pentagon, nothing fly's over the pentagon, there's just an explosion (I'm talking about the second security tape, I think it's from a gas station parking lot).

-Jimmy

How much of the Pentagon is shown in the videos?

reply to post by ULTIMA1


Well the first one is the pentagon security video, where we see a blue missle like object hit the pentagon.

This is the second one:



Don't be fooled, it may look like a plane hits it, but it's a white truck going by, you see it exit the other side of the trees.

-Jimmy

reply to post by SPreston
Originally posted by jimmyjackblack

If you don't mind me asking.
I hear you talk about a decoy plane, but what is it? Why was it flown if it was really there? Was it there for people to see a plane and think it was the one that hit the pentagon?

If you could explain what you mean about the decoy plane, that would be great.

We believe 9-11 was an Inside Job. Inside the Pentagon in the under-construction area were the DIA, ONI, and Navy intelligence sections. These intelligence agencies had always been antagonists of the NeoCONs and the CIA and had interrupted some of their illegal covert operations in the past.

These agencies were tasked with compiling data and communications and investigating the attack on the WTC. They were tracking aircraft on military radars and recording all communications. That could not be allowed. Also in the under-construction area were the auditors and their files, tasked with tracing the Defense Dept missing $2.3 Trillion announced by Rumsfeld on 9-10-2001. That could also not be allowed. So they were targeted by the 9-11 planners/perps for death and destruction.

However a 100 ton aircraft could not be counted on to complete the mission. The pilots might chicken out, the aircraft might crash before hitting the target, the aircraft might pull up too much and overfly the target, the aircraft might hit the wrong area of the building, or the aircraft might not penetrate far enough inside the building to take out the targets. So the 9-11 planners/perps decided on a military psyops mission to simulate an attack. US Military psyops teams are very well-trained and effective as are Israeli psyops teams.

They would pre-plant explosives inside the Pentagon to take out the targets. They would simulate an aircraft crashing into the Pentagon with staged light poles, planted witnesses, explosives in the construction trailers for a Hollywood special effects explosion and to blow debris out on the lawn, and a decoy aircraft to set the stage for the scripted aircraft crash into the wall. That is why some witnesses describe explosives and bombs inside the Pentagon.

They had the FBI censor all videos and photos in the area and confiscate the Arlington County 911 call-ins and transcripts for 9-11 and the days following. They interviewed all witnesses and ensured they had their stories correct or else. However they neglected to ensure that all potential eyewitnesses were effectively censored. Eyewitnesses popped up in DC placing the aircraft over DC and other eyewitnesses popped up endangering their psyops mission. However the bought and paid-for mainstream media were doing their part at keeping these witnesses out of sight.

Then those darned CIT guys and a few others stuck their noses in and found a whole bunch of eyewitnesses the FBI had neglected to silence. These eyewitnesses placed the decoy aircraft on the wrong side of the Potomac River and banking around Reagan airport and flying over the Navy Annex and flying North of the Citgo; rendering the official Flight 77 flight path south of the Navy Annex and through the light poles TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE. What you see on this forum is damage control by 'government loyalists' and 'government shills'. Even though they claim nobody listens to us and that we are ineffective nutcases, they oddly expend tremendous amounts of valuable time trying to silence us. They do the same thing on other forums also.

Pentagon Wedge one 1st floor area

Visit the Loose Change forum or Pilots for 9/11 Truth forum for much more information and greater detail than I can give here.

The North Side Flyover - Officially Documented, Independently Confirmed

By: Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team
August 4th, 2008
www.ThePentaCon.com

Video presentation to accompany this article available here.

Also jimmyjackblack and any other interested persons, check out this thread here on the ATS forum for more info.

reply to post by SPreston


Ya know to be honest with you, I think the pilot episode of THe Lone Gunmen might really be what happened, at least when the planes hit the towers, now with the pentagon, it's just not possible from what I can see, one reason is that you would have a huge gouge in the earth and a lot more than trees would be knocked over according to the first pentagon video.

-Jimmy

Originally posted by SPreston
Also in the under-construction area were the auditors and their files, tasked with tracing the Defense Dept missing $2.3 Trillion announced by Rumsfeld on 9-10-2001. That could also not be allowed. So they were targeted by the 9-11 planners/perps for death and destruction.

I'm not inclined to spend an hour or two refuting this lunacy, so I'll just reply to one point which is very illustrative of the remainder of this total unadulterated crap.

This intentional misinterpretation of of Rumsfeld's statements is a LIE. It is a very typical and transparent tactic of the "Truth Club" to perpetuate such BS.

The annual Department of Defense Budget for Fiscal Year 2002 (latter part of Calendar Year 2001) was $343.2 billion. So $ 2.3 Trillion would be approximately SIX (6) years of DoD budgets.

www.cdi.org...

So, the idiots who say it's missing (not Rumsfeld) would have you believe that nobody in DoD got paid and no tanks, aircraft, bullets, or beans were bought in SIX (6) years.

Rumsfeld was speaking of accounting issues and incompatible databases which would not allow the precise tracking of $$ within DoD. His speech was directed toward reorganization and improved compatible methods to track $$ more precisely, not that $$ was missing.

This is just one point from that tirade of lunacy just posted. The remainder of the tirade was more unsubstantiated fantasy from an agenda driven zealot.

Originally posted by jimmyjackblack
Don't be fooled, it may look like a plane hits it, but it's a white truck going by, you see it exit the other side of the trees.

Well also from the vantages of the cameras you cannot see if something did fly over the building.

Originally posted by Reheat
This intentional misinterpretation of of Rumsfeld's statements is a LIE. It is a very typical and transparent tactic of the "Truth Club" to perpetuate such BS.

I love how you call out everyone else as a liar but cannot post any real evidence to support your post and on top of that you spread the media lies.

So i would say (and prove) that you are the liar and spreading BS.

reply to post by Reheat


You gotta admit, the pilot episode of The Lone Gunmen is too close to be just a coiensodence.

There's a lot of mysteries in all this, but I must say that we will sadly only be able to get the full truth (probably), 35 years later, then all the files will be declassified.

Here's a thought though, if it were a fact that a plane hit the pentagon, why won't the FBI release all the footgage they that shows it being hit? It makes me think they have something to hide since all they show us is things that we can't make out. Also they obtained all that footage (security cameras from local businesses) within minutes of the plane hitting the pentagon. The have been many, many FOIA requests made, so why won't they release the footage?

I think it would finnally shut us CTers up if we could see what hit.

-Jimmy

Originally posted by SPreston

The North Side Flyover - Officially Documented, Independently Confirmed

By: Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team
August 4th, 2008
www.ThePentaCon.com

Video presentation to accompany this article available here.

Also jimmyjackblack and any other interested persons, check out this thread here on the ATS forum for more info.

Yes, and learn why CIT, Pilots for 9/11 Truth, and SPreston were easily shown to have absolutely no evidence of a jet flying away from the Pentagon.

They can't even come up with any eyewitnesses.