Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Ipso · 31-08-2020 5:51pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Debunkers have the same opinion for all conspiracies, you see the psyche in every thread.. Calling me a holocaust denier? These same people are continually promoting censorship of people's opinions on threads. They don’t have any self reflection and notice and see their own personality, much more in line with Nazism here.. .
I killed no Jewish person in my life and was not born in those times, so it's just bait and waffle for me. They now attempting to derail as you see:)

They do not allow people to question events that what they are truly what to quash out here!

I outlined what happened on 9/11- the Saudis, Pakistan, Muslim brotherhood, likely funded the 9/11 plane operation- Al Qaeda network is a myth.

Demolitions- There suspects: Mossad and neoconservative faction did it, or Pre War Nazis/criminal group was involved ( Dohnjoe think does not exist) yet the Israeli Mossad was trackiing down Nazis war criminals throughout South America many decades after WW2- Operation paperclip and other operations are a myth for him. Learn about the Nazis in South American you see the created a mini third reich in some countries in South America.. Of course this is not in history books Dohnjoe reads so its silliness and stupdity.. There more to the Nazi/9/11link, but the mind of Dohnjoe closed down to new information.

old-style-movie-projector-close-up-stock-photo__k46744289.jpg

Dohnjoe · 31-08-2020 5:53pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You are a regime follower!

And what regime is that?

Cheerful Spring2 · 31-08-2020 5:56pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

And what regime is that?

1984 thought secret police. Audio for the book online, listen. Promoting censorship shows how easily you could be sucked into something nasty, you just don't see it.

Dohnjoe · 31-08-2020 5:59pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

1984 thought secret police. Audio for the book online, listen. Promoting censorship shows how easily you could be sucked into something nasty, you just don't see it.

They don’t have any self reflection and notice and see their own personality, much more in line with Nazism here

Are you comparing posters who challenge your conspiracy theories on a public forum with fascists (from the novel 1984) and Nazi's?

Cheerful Spring2 · 31-08-2020 6:14pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Are you comparing posters who challenge your conspiracy theories on a public forum with fascists (from the novel 1984) and Nazi's?

Yes you don’t believe in democratic free speech and you promote the censorship of content online you deem unacceptable, not a lie, everyone sees it. We have seen how you really think on here. You even get nasty and personal and your other friend does too, when people question the 9/11 attack. It shows you could easily grow into being unhinged if we had a 1984 transforming event in the world. I could see you with a uniform and truncheon telling people want to believe and say.

King Mob · 31-08-2020 6:20pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Yes you don’t believe in democratic free speech and you promote the censorship of content online you deem unacceptable, not a lie, everyone sees it. We have seen how you really think on here. You even get nasty and personal and your other friend does too, when people question the 9/11 attack. It shows you could easily grow into being unhinged if we had a 1984 transforming event in the world. I could see you with a uniform and truncheon telling people want to believe and say.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adnazium.html

King Mob · 31-08-2020 6:30pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

1984 thought secret police. Audio for the book online, listen.

What's doubleplusgood is that the book is in part about how a regime manipulates people by causing doubt about actual history to the point where what's true isn't important to the regime.

Also, what's the bets that cheerful hasn't read it?

Dohnjoe · 31-08-2020 6:43pm

King Mob wrote: »

What's doubleplusgood is that the book is in part about how a regime manipulates people by causing doubt about actual history to the point where what's true isn't important to the regime.

Apparently history is there to be denied and replaced with spurious conspiracy theories, and anyone who questions those conspiracy theories is apparently a fascist/Nazi.. that's the message I'm getting here.

Anyway, back to Flight 77 flying over the Pentagon. Why did they fill a plane with passengers, maneuvering it directly at, then just over the Pentagon, then blow up the Pentagon with something, and in an insanely small amount of time run around planting wreckage of the plane both inside and outside the burning building, all the while whisking the passengers and crew away, in the same plane, on a clear day, where the movements of every aircraft were being scrutinized to the nth degree, whilst at the same time managing to control what hundreds of witnesses saw, and hiding all of that from every foreign government and intelligence agency and media outlet (who arrived within minutes) and expert in the world..

If it was planned, why didn't they just organise to fly suicide bombers into the building like every other attack that day?

Why did they have to pull off this stupidly over-elaborate and risky plan?

King Mob · 31-08-2020 6:53pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Apparently history is there to be denied and replaced with spurious conspiracy theories, and anyone who questions those conspiracy theories is apparently a fascist/Nazi.. that's the message I'm getting here.

Also apparently asking conspiracy theorists to outline and detail their conspiracy theory in full and to present the evidence they have for that is censorship.

War is peace. Etc. Etc.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If it was planned, why didn't they just organise to fly suicide bombers into the building like every other attack that day?

Why did they have to pull off this stupidly over-elaborate and risky plan?

Cause then what clues would they leave for people on the internet to find?

Ted_YNWA · 31-08-2020 9:02pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

I did ask this before, but nobody is interested in being helpful.

Can anyone please explain why 2 of the 3 images I successfully posted here recently, have since disappeared from their posts?

Last time I checked and went into "EDIT" or "QUOTE", the links were still in the text.

Now these have gone as well.

Mod
It looks to be a broken image link Ruby, I have provided a more detailed description in PM. Please reply there so not to derail the thread here.

Ruby gray · 01-09-2020 12:14am

King Mob wrote: »

But as I keep explaining if you can't even suggest a plausible reason for why they would do something so nonsensical, then it means that they didn't do it and there's another explanation for the things you keep pointing too.

So again can you explain why the government would have the plane fly over rather than crash into the building?

And I keep explaining that I am here to present evidence relative to the TOPIC OF THIS THREAD, which is studiously avoided by the majority of posters.

The point is this.

Two mutually exclusive scenarios cannot both be true.

1.
The government says AA77 was hijacked by 4 Arabs (although Barbara Olson allegedly told her husband there were 6 hijackers on board) and flown into the Pentagon. On its route it flew diagonally across the overpass bridge, hitting lightpoles, one of which smashed Lloyde England's cab

2.
Lloyde England says,

"That's what THEY say!!
"That's NOT TRUE!!
"THAT'S NOT WHERE IT HAPPENED!!"

Now that the details on videos and photos have been analysed thoroughly, it is clear that LLOYDE IS CORRECT.

Therefore scenario #1 is false.

The details following on from this realisation are legion and beyond the topic and capacity of this thread.
Your emotional attachment to what you fondly imagine to be the "facts" of 9/11 Pentagon is sonething you personally need to deal with.
It is not my job to persuade you with my personal speculations about details beyond those for which I have evidence.

DO PLEASE TRY TO ADDRESS THE TOPIC FOR THE FIRST TIME!!

Ruby gray · 01-09-2020 12:36am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I've made no petulant demands whatsoever. Have been patiently asking you basic common sense questions and elementary details of this theory. I've also pointed out glaring flaws in this theory.

So far you avoid the questions, you generally avoid providing details, you don't address the flaws, you haven't provided any credible evidence, you repeatedly stated you don't want to discuss your theory

The whole thing seems to be almost entirely extrapolated from one unreliable witness. No one determines such a scenario from one unreliable witness when there are over 100 witnesses available. Certainly not when there's a consensus on what happened.

And if you are going to go through each witness and claim they didn't see what they saw. That's nonsensical. And if you are going to do that in order to back what you perceive from one unreliable witness - that makes even less sense.

Keep in mind, you're basically claiming that history is wrong on this, that all the investigations were wrong - therefore your theory must have some really mind-blowingly strong evidence to contradict all that..

however all you are really doing here is demonstrating how vague and vapid this theory is.

I have reiterated many times.

I am not presenting "my theory" and nor do i need to invent a personal theory to cater to your whims.

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT LLOYDE ENGLAND AND HIS INVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 PENTAGON.

Everything you have written over the past 2 years here is therefore OFF-TOPIC, and a transparent attempt to derail the discussion, to slight anyone who does want to discuss it, and to libel an honest man who is a most significant, credible eyewitness in possession of the famous cab which is a testimony to the fact that the government version of 9/11 is a damnable lie.

It is clear that it is YOU who are avoiding all questions, that YOU are easily fooled by incomplete, vague, third-person poetic-licenced journalistic excerpts, rather than in pinning down eyewitness identifications and locations and first-person quotes which tell such a different story.

I have so far provided many scores of individual pieces of evidence which all contradict the government version, which you are afraid to address.

Yet YOU CANNOT PRODUCE THE NAME, LOCATION AND TESTIMONY OF ONE SINGLE EYEWITNESS WHO SAW THE PLANE FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

King Mob · 01-09-2020 12:37am

Ruby gray wrote: »

The point is this.

Two mutually exclusive scenarios cannot both be true.

1.
The government says AA77 was hijacked by 4 Arabs (although Barbara Olson allegedly told her husband there were 6 hijackers on board) and flown into the Pentagon. On its route it flew diagonally across the overpass bridge, hitting lightpoles, one of which smashed Lloyde England's cab

2.
Lloyde England says,

"That's what THEY say!!
"That's NOT TRUE!!
"THAT'S NOT WHERE IT HAPPENED!!"

Now that the details on videos and photos have been analysed thoroughly, it is clear that LLOYDE IS CORRECT.

Therefore scenario #1 is false.

And by that same token we know then that this issue is not solved by concluding that it's a government cover up.
It's not possible that the government said the plane went one direction when it in fact went another because there is no rational, plausible or sane reason for them to do so.

So even if we accept that scenario two is true and this guy is telling the truth, we still know there isn't a conspiracy here as you can't explain how it works or why it exists.
So there must be some other explanation.

King Mob · 01-09-2020 12:39am

Ruby gray wrote: »

Yet YOU CANNOT PRODUCE THE NAME, LOCATION AND TESTIMONY OF ONE SINGLE EYEWITNESS WHO SAW THE PLANE FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

Any luck finding one that said a plane flew over and away from the pentagon?

Any chance you can provide a reason for why the government would say the plane went in a direction it didn't?

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 12:57am

Ruby gray wrote: »

I have reiterated many times.

I am not presenting "my theory" and nor do i need to invent a personal theory to cater to your whims.

I am referring to the "false flag" theory you presented (the aircraft flying over the Pentagon)

THIS THREAD IS ABOUT LLOYDE ENGLAND AND HIS INVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 PENTAGON.

Right, and the part of the false flag event.

Everything you have written over the past 2 years here is therefore OFF-TOPIC, and a transparent attempt to derail the discussion, to slight anyone who does want to discuss it, and to libel an honest man who is a most significant, credible eyewitness in possession of the famous cab which is a testimony to the fact that the government version of 9/11 is a damnable lie.

Not off-topic. Lloyd George is just one witness (and an old man) whose been relentlessly badgered by conspiracy theorists because he changed his story when approached by them. This "false flag" theory of Flight 77 flying over the Pentagon seems to revolve heavily around one witness, which is absurd considering there were so many witnesses.

It is clear that it is YOU who are avoiding all questions, that YOU are easily fooled by incomplete, vague, third-person poetic-licenced journalistic excerpts, rather than in pinning down eyewitness identifications and locations and first-person quotes which tell such a different story.

You have been asked basic questions and for basic details about this theory you are suggesting, but you have so far avoided them and declare discussion of this "false flag event" as off-topic, despite it being in the topic and this entire thread being about the Pentagon attack

I have so far provided many scores of individual pieces of evidence which all contradict the government version, which you are afraid to address.

Not really no.

If you want to demonstrate that an entirely separate event happened at the Pentagon, then you have to at least provide the basic details of what happened, and evidence that directly supports that.

You need to, for example, explain how physical wreckage of the plane was found inside and outside the Pentagon, how is that possible if the plane flew over? (invented answers won't be entertained)

Explain why a forensic examination of the Pentagon was able to identify the remains of passengers and crew and hijackers from inside the Pentagon

And so on. At a very minimum.

Yet YOU CANNOT PRODUCE THE NAME, LOCATION AND TESTIMONY OF ONE SINGLE EYEWITNESS WHO SAW THE PLANE FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

Many witnesses saw Flight 77 crash into the Pentagon, none saw it fly over (that I'm aware of). The supporting evidence that Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon is overwhelming, however you haven't provided any credible evidence of this other theory yet.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 11:12am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Anyway, back to Flight 77 flying over the Pentagon. Why did they fill a plane with passengers, maneuvering it directly at, then just over the Pentagon, then blow up the Pentagon with something, and in an insanely small amount of time run around planting wreckage of the plane both inside and outside the burning building, all the while whisking the passengers and crew away, in the same plane, on a clear day, where the movements of every aircraft were being scrutinized to the nth degree, whilst at the same time managing to control what hundreds of witnesses saw, and hiding all of that from every foreign government and intelligence agency and media outlet (who arrived within minutes) and expert in the world..

Why did they have to pull off this stupidly over-elaborate and risky plan?

On the Pentagon security tape see an unusually large trial of fluffy/creamy smoke in the frame and I have read many accounts of people claiming to have saw the plane hit the Pentagon, and yet none one of them in the description says they saw this large plume of white smoking coming off the plane surface our the plane engine before it crashed? All these eyewitnesses somehow did not notice that?

Flight 77 went missing for a 25 minutes. The plane is commandeered at 8.54 and later radar, and tracking methods lost it till a fast-moving object was picked up again after 9.20am inside Washington DC airspace. Nobody saw the plane on a screen or followed it visually till Washington DC.

FDR was found after the crash and said to be the flight recorder for Flight 77. When people decoded the files the NTSB released, the plane was on the wrong side of the Navy Annex. The 9/11 commission says the plane was on the southside going west to the Pentagon. The FDR plane however on the northside going east to the Pentagon. The FDR also indicates this plane would fly over the Pentagon and keep going, but it does shut off at the expected official time of the crash 9.47am.

Debunkers of course ignore a strong piece of evidence the FDR, does not support the official story.

Government staged a event at the Pentagon?
Do you think they are lazy? They had no preparation and arrangements in place to fool people and the medià?
CIA/ Pentagon has world class forgers and photo manipulation experts. They could easily release images that look real to the public. I just throwing it out there as something that’s possible.

I open to all evidence here since I can see what they did in New York and NIST covered up how the buillding seven actually collapsed. When they lied there. Lies about the Pentagon attack may have taken place here too.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 11:36am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

If it was planned, why didn't they just organise to fly suicide bombers into the building like every other attack that day?

Why did they have to pull off this stupidly over-elaborate and risky plan?

The Pentagon attack is far more complicated compared to the events in New York. Two planes are hitting the Twin Towers high up..

At the Pentagon the alleged pilot Hani Hanjour manually held the commercial airliner stable at 2 feet of the Pentagon grass and drove it against the first floor wall of the Pentagon.

Thats why lot of pilots have said a human pilot could never do with a commercial airliner its not a fighter jet or drone.
Hani was supposedly doing all this flying at this height at 530mph an hour. Going at that speed low down buildings, pass your eyes in a flash.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 11:54am

May 2002 New York Times articles about Hani Hanjour.

A Trainee Noted for Incompetence

Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot.

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon,'' the former employee said. ''He could not fly at all.''

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/04/us/a-trainee-noted-for-incompetence.html

His an expert and skilled pilot on 9/11 according to US government version?

This is a red flag for me. Reported in Feb 2001 by a Phoenix flight School. How much better could he get in six months?

Mr. Hanjour, who investigators contend piloted the airliner that crashed into the Pentagon, was reported to the aviation agency in February 2001 after instructors at his flight school in Phoenix had found his piloting skills so shoddy and his grasp of English so inadequate that they questioned whether his pilot's license was genuine.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 12:09pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

The point is this.
The government says AA77 was hijacked by 4 Arabs (although Barbara Olson allegedly told her husband there were 6 hijackers on board) and flown into the Pentagon. On its route it flew diagonally across the overpass bridge, hitting lightpoles, one of which smashed Lloyde England's cab

True. She mentioned in her calls six men had hijacked the plane. She never described their appearance in any of the calls. We have no evidence from the passengers they were middle eastern men. US government released a Airport security tape alleged to be taken on the day of 9/11 at the airport and shows the supposed 5 hijackers even though Olsen says there was six of them taking over the plane.. The Dulles security tape has no time or date stamp, why that is just another enigma.
Of course many doubt phones calls were made here. That another piece of the story.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 12:29pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Apparently history is there to be denied and replaced with spurious conspiracy theories, and anyone who questions those conspiracy theories is apparently a fascist/Nazi.. that's the message I'm getting here.

You can challenge our logic, assumptions, theories and take on the events that fine, but you encourage and promote censorship of material and articles that disagree with your point of view. Obviously you unable to understand what the problem is.
You have one track mind that 9/11 is a dealt with event and nothing unusual transpired here? Your opinion, and i don’t ask, for you understood and believed content to be pulled down off the internet, do I?. People who believe 9/11 was a false flag event, should be allowed to watch this content, freely and not have it censored by government think tanks hired by google and Facebook.

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 12:38pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

On the Pentagon security tape see an unusually large trial of fluffy/creamy smoke in the frame and I have read many accounts of people claiming to have saw the plane hit the Pentagon, and yet none one of them in the description says they saw this large plume of white smoking coming off the plane surface our the plane engine before it crashed? All these eyewitnesses somehow did not notice that?

I believe one of the engines was smoking, show us the video or clip of the "unusually large trial of fluffy/creamy smoke"

Disclaimer: if you are going to pull out grainy black and white images and start playing games of "seeing" things in photos like you've done before, that isn't going to wash

Flight 77 went missing for a 25 minutes. The plane is commandeered at 8.54 and later radar, and tracking methods lost it till a fast-moving object was picked up again after 9.20am inside Washington DC airspace. Nobody saw the plane on a screen or followed it visually till Washington DC.

The hijackers switched off the transponder.

FDR was found after the crash and said to be the flight recorder for Flight 77. When people decoded the files the NTSB released, the plane was on the wrong side of the Navy Annex. The 9/11 commission says the plane was on the southside going west to the Pentagon. The FDR plane however on the northside going east to the Pentagon. The FDR also indicates this plane would fly over the Pentagon and keep going, but it does shut off at the expected official time of the crash 9.47am.

The FDR is genuine, the last few seconds of the file are corrupted. This has been explained, you won't accept any explanation, you constantly attack/discredit every detail in order to hint some unspecified conspiracy took place

Government staged a event at the Pentagon?
Do you think they are lazy? They had no preparation and arrangements in place to fool people and the medià?
CIA/ Pentagon has world class forgers and photo manipulation experts. They could easily release images that look real to the public. I just throwing it out there as something that’s possible.

I open to all evidence here since I can see what they did in New York and NIST covered up how the buillding seven actually collapsed. When they lied there. Lies about the Pentagon attack may have taken place here too.

Then explain the event you keep claiming happened.

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 12:45pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

You can challenge our logic

Haven't come across any logic yet, that's the key problem.

You are claiming historical fact, stuff that is taught in schools and universities, is incorrect. Cool, so what happened?

Did the plane fly over the Pentagon? yes or no?

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 12:52pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

May 2002 New York Times articles about Hani Hanjour.

A Trainee Noted for Incompetence

Completely true, which was already pointed out. And then he went on to get his private license and then his commercial license and received a result of satisfactory. You know all this, yet despite that you keep trying to discredit his flying skills in order to maintain it was impossible for him to hit the Pentagon..

Whilst forgetting you maintain he flew the plane into the Pentagon

Don't worry, I know you'll imagine up something to "explain" that gap in logic

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 1:02pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I believe one of the engines was smoking, show us the video or clip of the "unusually large trial of fluffy/creamy smoke"

Disclaimer: if you are going to pull out grainy black and white images and start playing games of "seeing" things in photos like you've done before, that isn't going to wash

The hijackers switched off the transponder.

The FDR is genuine, the last few seconds of the file are corrupted. This has been explained, you won't accept any explanation, you constantly attack/discredit every detail in order to hint some unspecified conspiracy took place

Then explain the event you keep claiming happened.

Watch. Youtube pulling higher definition videos of this attack, but i found this one. What thats trail if its not white smoke?

How could eyewitnesses miss that trail of smoke when the plane flew across the bridge? No eyewitness to the crash reported seeing that why?

Yes but Flight 77 disappeared for 25 minutes, in that time an Operation Northwoods type switch in mid-flight potentially could have taken place. I not saying that happened but there still confusion was it flight 77 or another air vehicle crashing at the Pentagon?

Debunkers claim its corrupted data with no evidence. What agency here supports the debunkers claim? The NTSB released the data and have not commented since and yet the debunkers online keep saying their missing data? There no evidence of missing data because the plane travels from the airport and the recorder cuts off near the bridge. In the next second the plane at the Pentagon ( it going 530mph an hour) all recording should stop then. Missing seconds of data is nonsense.

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 1:23pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Completely true, which was already pointed out. And then he went on to get his private license and then his commercial license and received a result of satisfactory. logic

When and what date in 2001 all this take place?
The Phoenix flight school reported Hani to the aviation agency in Feb 2001 regarding his pilot licence was fake and not real. Hardly something you do if Hani was an experienced pilot?
Hani in the space of six months went from a novice- had bad flying skills to someone who had the skill of combatant fighter pilot?

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 1:28pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are claiming historical fact, stuff that is taught in schools and universities, is incorrect. Cool, so what happened?

I think you ever came across this saying. History is written by the victors.”

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 1:29pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

How could eyewitnesses miss that trail of smoke when the plane flew across the bridge?

Maybe they didn't notice it, or maybe they didn't feel the need to mention it, maybe it only occurred close to the Pentagon, what's the conspiracy explanation?

No eyewitness to the crash reported seeing that why?

Maybe people who've just seen a large airliner crash into the Pentagon didn't feel the need to mention smoke, what's the conspiracy explanation?

Yes but Flight 77 disappeared for 25 minutes, in that time an Operation Northwoods type switch in mid-flight

Evidence of this switch?

If you have none, then this notion can be completely dismissed. See how you try to create a different theory out of every perceived discrepancy you can find.

That's because you are illogically attacking the facts in any way possible to hint at some vague changeable conspiracy theory, without detailing that conspiracy theory, something you keep demonstrating over and over again.

Debunkers claim its corrupted data with no evidence.

It's genuine. It demonstrates the flight path and is in line with all the other evidence. What's the conspiracy explanation?

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 1:32pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

I think you ever came across this saying. History is written by the victors.”

It's a trope, history is written by the writers.

9/11 is one of the most studied events of this century and the subject of the largest FBI investigation in it's history. You've personally decided that everything we know about 9/11 is magically wrong and some vague randomly changing conspiracy took place. A conspiracy involving "secret Nazi's" and Joe Biden, that's the level we are dealing with here

Dohnjoe · 01-09-2020 1:38pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Hani in the space of six months went from a novice- had bad flying skills to someone who had the skill of combatant fighter pilot?

As explained repeatedly, a novice pilot with about the same experience attempted the same maneuver on a proper Boeing simulator. He hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times.

A Dutch conspiracy show did this experiment, so the notion that Hani "couldn't" have done the maneuvour is debunked by that. Not that it was required, thanks to all the separate pillars of corroborating evidence, we know Hani flew the plane and it took that flight path and that it hit the Pentagon

Cheerful Spring2 · 01-09-2020 1:58pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Maybe they didn't notice it, or maybe they didn't feel the need to mention it, maybe it only occurred close to the Pentagon, what's the conspiracy explanation?

Maybe people who've just seen a large airliner crash into the Pentagon didn't feel the need to mention smoke, what's the conspiracy explanation?

Evidence of this switch?

If you have none, then this notion can be completely dismissed. See how you try to create a different theory out of every perceived discrepancy you can find.

That's because you are illogically attacking the facts in any way possible to hint at some vague changeable conspiracy theory, without detailing that conspiracy theory, something you keep demonstrating over and over again.

It's genuine. It demonstrates the flight path and is in line with all the other evidence. What's the conspiracy explanation?

Many people saw an airplane before the bridge. You assume they had a clear view of the jet hitting the west side at the Pentagon?

Debunkers of course will now undertake deflection and ignore none of witnesses to this crash witnessed a large smoke trail . How many of these witnesses truly saw this plane crash? How many made up a tale after the fact, after listening, and reading about other planes crashing in New York?

Not one eyewitness mentioned the plane engine was smoking heavily, potentially on fire here. If i had a clear view of the plane crash it not something i would fail to mention in my description to reporters.

FDR does not support the official flight path? Why do you keep claiming it does here??

US government says the plane flew on a south path to the west, knocked over some light poles and crashed at the Pentagon. The FDR does show this, the plane here is flying a north path to the east,. It went over the top of the bridge at 180 feet, can’t knock lightpoles at that height and then the animation/ CSR shuts off at 9.47am ( the official time for the crash)

Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Comments