Official Story Shill Crushed By Truther/Researcher in Radio Debate!

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

Will you let me know the names of the witnesses who said " the jet kept on going " and point me in the direction of their statements please ?

Yes, witness Erik Dihle saw or came into contact with some people who were yelling that a bomb went off and the jet kept on going. As we know, he also later refuted the official RADES data flight path of the C-130 as well,

ERIK DIHLE (explaining where the second plane came from): "I would say somewhere between west by northwest."

CRAIG RANKE : "Sure, but definitely not from the south?"

ERIK DIHLE : "Oh no... not from the south. No way. Nope. We--- unless somebody telling you [inaud] that's something I didn't-- didn't witness. This plane definitely came from the.. absolutely positively it came from the west or northwest."

I know you want to cry hearsay, but this isn't a court room. Your choice to move goal posts is your own, but it doesn't help your cause.

In the context of videos presented in this thread, Jeff Hill's videos of pentagon "impact" witnesses only has 4929 views and 16 likes and 18 dislikes. National Security Alert has 419,135 views on one channel and 2765 likes and 167 dislikes. Their vimeo has another 128k views. So I don't think you guys can really contain this.

I think the new year is going to bring some interesting developments with CIT.

Originally posted by WetBlanky

I think the new year is going to bring some interesting developments with CIT.

Can I quote you on this? Because when CIT ends up with the same old cobb-webbed page and the same-old "Operation Accountability" vapid emptiness and the same old conjecture and speculation and imagination and creativity and inventiveness and cherry-picking and obfuscation and outright lying comes around, I'd like to be able to point to whatever "...interesting developments..." you are claiming are in store and start the latest point-and-laugh routine.

reply to post by WetBlanky



oh, how hilarious the yellow line drawn on that.....silly to any person who understands aviation.

Silly, silly and is typical. Seen it, so often......

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by WetBlanky

I think the new year is going to bring some interesting developments with CIT.

Can I quote you on this? Because when CIT ends up with the same old cobb-webbed page and the same-old "Operation Accountability" vapid emptiness and the same old conjecture and speculation and imagination and creativity and inventiveness and cherry-picking and obfuscation and outright lying comes around, I'd like to be able to point to whatever "...interesting developments..." you are claiming are in store and start the latest point-and-laugh routine.

Well I'm sure we can count on you in a pinch to make a comment like that. You'd never leave someone waiting would ya?

I would suggest you take a look around, CIT have been meeting with congressmen and senators. One of them just destroyed a major mouthpiece for the govts story in a debate.

Just because people are scared to or don't know how to argue or present the evidence doesn't change the evidence and it being proof of an inside job. Just because people are scared of rocking a fragile economic boat doesn't change the evidence and it being proof of an inside job. Just because people don't want to have to admit they were wrong or that their government would be capable of doing this doesn't change the evidence and it being proof of an inside job.

People get nervous and chicken out, I'm sure you'd understand this. For instance, this long time CIT detractor named Pinch Paisley once got close enough to Lagasse during a fire drill at the Pentagon he could blow him a kiss and yet he completely chickened out on the opportunity to ask him about CIT and most importantly the north side flight path he witnessed. Here was his opportunity to get dirt on CIT or prove Lagasse was mistaken and he totally chickened out. I am sure he was afraid of getting confirmation of the north side flight path and furthermore walking away convinced himself.

This is a scary subject, trebor. I know. I understand. But if it makes you feel better and superior to belittle the efforts of others, go on ahead. I am not sure what it does for the security, justice, due process, and freedoms afforded to us by this country.

Duplicate

Originally posted by WetBlanky

This is a scary subject, trebor. I know. I understand. But if it makes you feel better and superior to belittle the efforts of others, go on ahead. I am not sure what it does for the security, justice, due process, and freedoms afforded to us by this country.

You are correct. It would take someone of the collective intelligence of a CIT'er or a PfT'er to interrupt a Pentagon Police Lieutenant in the midst of coordinating a fire drill and who had a number of junior associates with him, according to the post you are referring to. They were outside at the Pentagon Conference Center and Library and - again - it would take one of CIT or PfTs finest to go up to someone in that position and responsibility and interrupt him in the middle of his official duties and start asking him about something that the United States District Court contained "...little in terms of factual content" and was filled only with “speculation and conjecture” and was the product of "cynical delusion and fantasy" and was thrown out for being frivolous and factually baseless -- "indeed, because they are fanciful, fanatic, and delusional" claims. What else do you do for entertainment? Go up to policemen who are in the middle of a a shootout and ask them about doughnuts?

"Belittling" the efforts of others is a blast when those "efforts" are cynical, frivolous, factually baseless, delusional, fantasy-based lies (What ever happened to that libel case against Nick Schou that CIT said they were going to file? What's that? It was never filed? But I watched them on YouTube saying he libeled them!)

Congressmen and Senators? Sure. Name them. Now, here.

Edited to add: It is only scary to paranoid and frightened, lunatic conspiracy alien reptoids who really have no life other than sleeping on a friend's basement couch or making hilarious YouTube videos riddled with accusations of libel that are never followed up on.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

oh, how hilarious the yellow line drawn on that.....silly to any person who understands aviation.

Silly, silly and is typical. Seen it, so often......

All you have to do is know where Andrews AFB is in relation to the National Mall and listen to the clearance given to the C-130 ("Turn left heading 270 within 3 DME of Andrews, radar vectors BUFFR and climb to 3,000 feet) to know that if you fly that departure (which, coincidentally is the Camp Springs 1) you will *not* even come close to that yellow line. Not even close. BUT...you'd have to have a scintilla of aviation "stuff" in your blood to understand that.

The C-130 piloted by Lt Col O'Brien crossed over the Potomac River and the north/south runway at Washington National at about 4000 feet.
Since the departing and arriving airplanes all went through the River Approaches, which all come from north or south, it is the best and safest crossing for planes leaving Andrews and go northwest or southwest after passing over National Airport.

O'Brien and crew were returning to their home Air Guard base in Minnesota.

reply to post by snowcrash911

There are no confirmed witnesses to the "official NoC path" either.

I snipped the irrelevant rant Snowcrash. I hope you don't mind.

"A mile" discrepancy? Huh? The nearest drawn NOC path drawn to the official path was @500 feet.
The furthest was @750ft.

They all described the aircraft as travelling between the Citgo Gas Station and Arlington Cemetery. Many at Arlington Cemetery maintenance buildings described the aircraft as heading right for them. Nearly all described the aircraft as banking around the Arlington carpark.

The majority ubercorroborated (new word) the latter description:



William Middleton couldn't even see the official path yet described the same manouevre from a narrow field of vision from his POV.



William Lagasse couldn't physically see the official path no matter how much you nitpick about being 20ft away at the wrong gaspump. And his partner drew almost the exact same flightpath as him from a POV behind the gas station.

Even GLs acknowledge that Terry Morin is a North of Columbia Pike witness which is just as fatal to the official path as the established NOC path.

Jeff Hill tried and couldn't find one "SOC witness". How many NOC witnesses did he uncover before he changed tact and didn't bother his ass to ask about the flightpath?

And here you are offering Roosevelt Roberts as an "SOC witness"?? The same guy who claimed to see "another plane" in south parking after the explosion hit?

Roberts: From the time the impact hit until I ran outside...
(...)
Roberts: Upon impact, I stepped out of the little booth that I was at. And the distance between that booth and the edge of the dock is like maybe, I don't know, 7 steps away from there.

The same guy ridiculed and called a "liar" by your bud Chris Sarns?

Wow.

Fail.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
Here's an interesting image from the day after 9/11..

The downed lightples and the bridge are waay to the right of that image.

Why do you suppose those FBI types are searching the NOC area for evidence? Maybe they were pointed in that direction for "some reason". Hmm?

They screened the entire area. Standard procedure. Why don't you show the pictures of FBI agents picking up plane pieces? Oh, you don't like those pictures? Not keen on sharing, are you? Peter Piper planted plane parts and poles at the Pentagon?

Oh and lastly, why would there be anything to pick up if the plane hit nothing? Could you answer that question for me please? Thanks in advance.

edit on 11-12-2011 by snowcrash911 because: (no reason given)

It's also standard procedure to grid the area off, photograph, mark and identify evidence at a crime scene or crash site. Those "suits" photographed picking up scraps of metal on the lawn, was that "standard procedure"? Or the FBI response to FOIA requests to identify plane parts..."we just assumed.."

Three fake firefighters were arrested on the scene, never to be discussed again. One guy was roused hanging around the temporary morgue. Roosevelt Roberts claimed that people were stealing from the scene while he was on guard duty at the heliport after the attack.

There were multiple evacuations throughout the day. The place was in intentional chaos while the FBI scurried about sequestering all videotapes in the area. Priorities, huh?

No matter, the FBI personnel scanning the NOC area, are there any images of them scouring the official path spanse of land? If not, your claim of "standard procedure" is pure specuation given that they followed no obvious procedure at all at the Pentagon.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Originally posted by Alfie1
There is nothing mysterious about Warren Stutt. He has a BSc (hons) degree in computer science and has put a lot of time into decoding AA 77's FDR.

He was welcome and respected at P4t until he started teasing out readings from the FDR which shot the flyover theory to pieces. He is of course now the devil incarnate..

Exactly. P4T's "experts" didn't discover the last seconds of the FDR data because they are incompetent.

I could reproduce Warren's work if I wanted to, and maybe I will.

In any case, Warren's work, from one programmer to another, is outstanding.

Okay, have you or Alfie verified the data for yourselves?

Has Frank Legge found a single pilot to back his ridiculous paper?

And the officially released NTSB data has been followed to the letter by Pilotsfor911truth, from the alleged data itself to the official "time of impact".

The heat could have been turned way up on the NTSB/FBI to explain these anomalies, but I guess those "extra seconds" panned out the way they were supposed to.

Trust me, if Warren's program lead to the slightest whiff of "inside job", he'd be getting the "snakeoil salesman" treatment right now by the likes of you two.

You make Rob Balsamo's correspondence with Warren Stutt out to be a witchhunt when in reality he answered every single question asked of him to help with the aerodynamics and aviation lingo. Warren Stutt, accepted what suited his program and completely ignored valid points.

Here's a few just off the top of my head..

pilotsfor911truth.org...

-99 PA (174 True) being hypothetically recorded 1.5 seconds west of the wall means based on speed it would need to descend almost 100-120 feet in roughly 0.3 seconds to hit pole 1, and then pull level almost instantaneously...impossible.. or descend 129 in 1.5 seconds to impact the pentagon creating a more than 6 degree slope (86 f/s drop) which clears all the tops of the poles... If trends are continued as shown in your data from last interval (59 f/s drop) and considering the descent would be less than 59 f/s based on positive G's over 1 for that segment, but, lets just do 1 G linear trend.. 59*1.5 = 88.5... 174 - 88.5 = 85.5. Still too high for the impact hole. Again, this is at 1 G linear descent rate using 'best' case scenario for an impact based on your data. If we incorporate the increase in positive G loads, whoosh... right over the top... and would be consistent with the radalt bouncing off the top of the pentagon and Turcious statements of "pulling up to clear...".

pilotsfor911truth.org...

The Radar Altitude prior to that is 57 feet. There is a one second interval between the two. Based on speed, thats only 815 feet horizontally. The light poles cover an area up to ~1020 feet from the pentagon. The light poles only get up to 36 feet above ground IIRC? 57' is too high to hit the initial light poles The slope made by the RadAlt is also above the tops of the poles when working backwards from the impact hole. This is why we have to look at Pressure Altitude adjusted to True altitude and correlate for a more precise measurement and placement of the aircraft. Since the Pressure altitude is still too high, the only logical conclusion based on the data is that the Radar Altitude at 4 feet is not measuring the distance to the ground, but some other higher object, perhaps the top of the Pentagon?

*Frank Legge actually increased this alleged 57ft RADALT reading by another 16ft by claiming that the alleged 4ft reading was at lightpole 3*

Read this very important exchange between Warren Stutt and Rob Balsamo which Warren completely ignored. Warren's reason for rejecting PA in favour of RADALT. He is completely wrong

pilotsfor911truth.org...

And two important posts on the limitations of RADALT and Warren's speculation regarding these limitations:

pilotsfor911truth.org...
pilotsfor911truth.org...

There's much more but I just realized that neither of you will bother your asses to read them?

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by ThePostExaminer

 

You like to toss around "technical" terms, acronyms like "PA"?

You know, the "data" that GLs have pinned their colours to while rejecting the NTSB released official data that shows PA too high to hit the poles or the building?

Warren Stutt's "data" that still doesn't add up to "impact"?

I presume you mean "Pressure Altitude" there, with the "PA".....have you not been introduced to "RA" yet? (Radio Altitude, or sometimes called "Radar Altitude").

The final reading, from Warren Stutt, was ~4 feet on the RA.

I'd suggest, rather than continuing to believe every nonsense claim by "CIT" and the "P4T" (who, by the way, I odn't think even like each other any more), perhaps it would be useful to actually, physically travel to the Pentagon one day. You need to see the area with your own eyes, rather than relying on all of this baloney that has bee fed to you.

The Metro DC area has a good public transportation system, you can get to the Pentagon easily via bus or rail.

You can then stroll the grounds, and the immediate vicinity. (Public access areas, of course).

So you reject the official data and conclusions drawn from it by the NTSB? Gotcha. Gaddam official narrative..

The RADALT exceeded its limitations, no?



And the final MSL height in the "extra" data Warren decoded shows 174' MSL (above sea level), No?

Have you verified Warren Stutt's program for yourself?

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

Will you let me know the names of the witnesses who said " the jet kept on going " and point me in the direction of their statements please ?

Yoohoo!

Did you miss my post addressed to you Alfie?
I hope you'll break the mould of the other cherrypick snipers here. You know, the guys who constantly ridicule CIT and Pilotsfor911truth, yet are here almost 24/7 avoiding posts.

Imagine that. A thread about NOC witnesses and everybody wants to talk about something else..

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

Will you let me know the names of the witnesses who said " the jet kept on going " and point me in the direction of their statements please ?

Yoohoo!

Did you miss my post addressed to you Alfie?
I hope you'll break the mould of the other cherrypick snipers here. You know, the guys who constantly ridicule CIT and Pilotsfor911truth, yet are here almost 24/7 avoiding posts.

Imagine that. A thread about NOC witnesses and everybody wants to talk about something else..

I would say Alfie is still waiting for an answer. You never did provide him with the names of the witnesses who said "the jet kept going" nor where their statements were that you are basing this on.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer


Are you familiar with the acronym "OSS"?

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

Will you let me know the names of the witnesses who said " the jet kept on going " and point me in the direction of their statements please ?

Yoohoo!

Did you miss my post addressed to you Alfie?
I hope you'll break the mould of the other cherrypick snipers here. You know, the guys who constantly ridicule CIT and Pilotsfor911truth, yet are here almost 24/7 avoiding posts.

Imagine that. A thread about NOC witnesses and everybody wants to talk about something else..

I would say Alfie is still waiting for an answer. You never did provide him with the names of the witnesses who said "the jet kept going" nor where their statements were that you are basing this on.

I asked Alfie a valid quesion first. This entire thread is testament to GL dodging and obfuscation.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
reply to post by snowcrash911

 

There are no confirmed witnesses to the "official NoC path" either.

I snipped the irrelevant rant Snowcrash. I hope you don't mind.

"A mile" discrepancy? Huh? The nearest drawn NOC path drawn to the official path was @500 feet.
The furthest was @750ft.

They all described the aircraft as travelling between the Citgo Gas Station and Arlington Cemetery. Many at Arlington Cemetery maintenance buildings described the aircraft as heading right for them. Nearly all described the aircraft as banking around the Arlington carpark.

The majority ubercorroborated (new word) the latter description:

William Middleton couldn't even see the official path yet described the same manouevre from a narrow field of vision from his POV.

William Lagasse couldn't physically see the official path no matter how much you nitpick about being 20ft away at the wrong gaspump. And his partner drew almost the exact same flightpath as him from a POV behind the gas station.

Even GLs acknowledge that Terry Morin is a North of Columbia Pike witness which is just as fatal to the official path as the established NOC path.

Jeff Hill tried and couldn't find one "SOC witness". How many NOC witnesses did he uncover before he changed tact and didn't bother his ass to ask about the flightpath?

And here you are offering Roosevelt Roberts as an "SOC witness"?? The same guy who claimed to see "another plane" in south parking after the explosion hit?

Roberts: From the time the impact hit until I ran outside...
(...)
Roberts: Upon impact, I stepped out of the little booth that I was at. And the distance between that booth and the edge of the dock is like maybe, I don't know, 7 steps away from there.

The same guy ridiculed and called a "liar" by your bud Chris Sarns?

Wow.

Fail.

Bump for Mr Snowcrash.

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by WetBlanky

 

Will you let me know the names of the witnesses who said " the jet kept on going " and point me in the direction of their statements please ?

Yoohoo!

Did you miss my post addressed to you Alfie?
I hope you'll break the mould of the other cherrypick snipers here. You know, the guys who constantly ridicule CIT and Pilotsfor911truth, yet are here almost 24/7 avoiding posts.

Imagine that. A thread about NOC witnesses and everybody wants to talk about something else..

I would say Alfie is still waiting for an answer. You never did provide him with the names of the witnesses who said "the jet kept going" nor where their statements were that you are basing this on.

I asked Alfie a valid quesion first. This entire thread is testament to GL dodging and obfuscation.

Ok, I'll ask you a direct question then while you wait for Alfie to answer.

Can your provide the names of the "witnesses" who said "the jet just kept going" and where these statements from them (the "witnesses") are located?

Thanks, as they say, in advance.

reply to post by ThePostExaminer

The RADALT exceeded its limitations, no?

No.

That is another in the long litany of lies from sites like the "P4T'. More obfuscation and red herring rhetoric.

Originally posted by snowcrash911

Lagasse specifically states he saw the plane crash, then went over there and saw plane debris inside the building, including an airplane engine.

Are YOU calling him a damn liar, "ATH911"? Did Lagasse "invent" the plane engine he saw inside the building?

No.

Are you calling him a "damn" liar that he saw a NoC flightpath, along with Officer Brooks who confirmed his NoC flightpath even though they had never discussed it with each other before?

.