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

King Mob · 02-09-2020 11:24am

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Do you not believe the FDR is an important item of evidence, yes/no. What we are trying to sort out is - why is it Flight 77 on the wrong flight path?

Why indeed. You guys don't seem to be able to offer any explanation for that.

Why did the government claim the plane was on a different path?

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

US government says the plane heading is a south path to the west of the Annex and the Citgo gas station and seconds later the plane crashed at the Pentagon.

You are contradicting yourself. You previously claimed that the government said the plane was heading southwest towards the pentgon.

It's a bit obvious that you don't have a good grasp of how directions work.

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

To the eye it looks like a plane has crashed at the Pentagon but was that plane Flight 77? We assuming here also was only one plane in the area heading to the Pentagon?

And once again, you've contradicted your previous position.
You previously stated that it absolutley was flight 77.

You are so dishonest that you are willing to abbandon your previous claims at the drop of a hat if you think it can support a conspiracy.

Why do you have to do that?
Why believe in the conspiracy theory when you have to do so much lying and mental gymnastics?

Cheerful Spring2 · 02-09-2020 11:30am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's not like he was the only witness and the only piece of evidence to a murder. Well over 100 people saw what happened. There is a vast amount of circumstantial, physical, and corroborating evidence of the event.

And even though the Pentagon security tape appears to show one engine on fire or at the very least heavy smoke coming off it when the object appears on the frame, the 100 eyewitnesses never noticed that considerable smoke? What likely happened here s people heard noises and saw an object over Washington DC When you go to the Pentagon there an interstate highway in the way, this not a place for walkers and sightseers, there likely only a few people in cars who saw a streak of an object hit the wall when its moving at 530 mph an hour.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 11:33am

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

? What likely happened here s people heard noises and saw an object over Washington DC When you go to the Pentagon there an interstate highway in the way, this not a place for walkers and sightseers, there likely only a few people in cars who saw a streak of an object hit the wall when its moving at 530 mph an hour.

But they were completely and perfectly accurate when it comes to the planes position and heading...

Regardless, no witnesses claim what you now suddenly believe.
None report the plane flying over and away from the pentagon.

Ruby gray · 02-09-2020 11:37am

King Mob wrote: »

Yea. You guys really don't like being asked questions and having pointed out to you when you're running away from them.

I imagine that's pretty annoying.

But I suppose ignoring is easier than considering why you can't answer these questions.

OH AREN'T YOU FUNNY.
You are the one running away from facts and cold hard evidence.

NAME SOMEBODY WHO SAW THE PLANE FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 11:43am

Ruby gray wrote: »

OH AREN'T YOU FUNNY.

That's a matter of taste.
I wasn't trying to be funny.

Ruby gray wrote: »

You are the one running away from facts and cold hard evidence.

But I'm not. I've explained this to you many many times. You keep ignoring the points.

We both know why you're ignoring them.

Ruby gray wrote: »

NAME SOMEBODY WHO SAW THE PLANE FLY ACROSS THE BRIDGE.

I don't know any who did. Never claimed otherwise.

Any chance you found the names of people who saw the plane fly up and over the pentagon?
As you yelled:

Ruby gray wrote: »

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Cheerful Spring2 · 02-09-2020 11:49am

Dohnjoe wrote: »

You are using a trick here. You are deliberately changing the parameters, this is because 9/11 truthers know that the flight path is easier to dispute that the Pentagon literally being struck by the aircraft - which is naturally why they do it. Which is bizarre behaviour when you think about it.

A plane heading to the Pentagon from two contrasting spots is a big deal. Debunkers of course downplay the FDR does not support the US government position
FDR showed flight 77 was heading along the path outlined by the US government, you be using it as evidence to discredit us here!!1! You being a hypocrite here.

Friends of yours claim missing data. Missing seconds of data, frames at the end, but where? The plane entire travel is indicated from the airport to the bridge at the Pentagon. There can’t be missing seconds from this tape like debunkers like to defend? If there was how come they have not produced this fresh animation in over a decade?

King Mob · 02-09-2020 11:53am

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Friends of yours claim missing data. Missing seconds of data, frames at the end, but where? The plane entire travel is indicated from the airport to the bridge at the Pentagon. There can’t be missing seconds from this tape like debunkers like to defend? If there was how come they have not produced this fresh animation in over a decade?

But your conspiracy friend there just claimed that the entire set of data was fabricated.

Also, the flight data does not show the plane flying over and away from the pentagon? How is that possible if the data wasn't tampered with?

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 12:04pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Do you not believe the FDR is an important item of evidence, yes/no.

It's an important piece of evidence. It's been examined (by experts and proper air crash investigators) and supports the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

You, an internet lay-person, are trying to distort/twist the interpretation of the data in order to hint there's some discrepancy, in order to cast doubt on the event, in order to suggest some unspecified changeable conspiracy took place

There's no logic or reason or rational to that approach. You've decided the event is some sort of "conspiracy" in your head, and you keep trying to randomly discredit everything you can, in order to suggest "something else" happened. And as demonstrated you have zero interest in supporting that "something else"

An endless hamster wheel of blind denial and discreditation

To the eye it looks like a plane has crashed at the Pentagon but was that plane Flight 77? We assuming here also was only one plane in the area heading to the Pentagon?

You've just suggested a brand new theory. That an aircraft hit but it's not Flight 77 now, correct? and another one, "multiple aircraft"

What is your support evidence for this new theory?

This isn't the "multi-verse", multiple sequences of events didn't take place, on that day, one thing happened. If you are claiming a "different plane" hit the Pentagon, show us the credible supporting evidence for that

Denial and discrediting stuff is not supporting evidence of anything. This has been explained to you many times now

You can't endlessly deny e.g. the Battle of Hastings to hint that some conspiracy took place instead. Yet that's all you do here.

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 12:07pm

List is growing

Flight 77 hit the Pentagon but from a "slightly different angle"
Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon
Flight 77 wasn't really Flight 77
There were multiple aircraft that day

It's like an incredulity based choose-your-own-adventure. I wonder what their wikipedia pages would look like, I am guessing very blank

King Mob · 02-09-2020 12:11pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

List is growing

Flight 77 hit the Pentagon but from a "slightly different angle"
Flight 77 flew over the Pentagon
Flight 77 wasn't really Flight 77
There were multiple aircraft that day

It's like an incredulity based choose-your-own-adventure. I wonder what their wikipedia pages would look like, I am guessing very blank

We've also had the idea that this rando taxi driver was part of the conspiracy and not part of the conspiracy.

Oh and also, it was a missile that hit the Pentagon and all the eyewitnesses that said otherwise were completely wrong. You can't trust eyewitness testimony don't you know.

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 12:26pm

King Mob wrote: »

Oh and also, it was a missile that hit the Pentagon and all the eyewitnesses that said otherwise were completely wrong. You can't trust eyewitness testimony don't you know.

I can't believe this has to be spelled out but it does..

Witnesses, for an event that e.g. happens in a few seconds, can be individually unreliable when it comes to precise details. An individual witness can also be wrong, or change their story.

This is why investigators always look at the consensus of witnesses. Along with all the other corroborating information.

For example a couple of witnesses claim they saw a corporate jet. That doesn't mean "ZOMG offiCiaL NarRatIve FalSe, it Was ANoTher PlaNe", it means those two witnesses, from their viewpoints, and proximity, and their limited information saw what they believed was a smaller aircraft.

There is obviously no other evidence of a corporate jet being hijacked or striking the Pentagon. The witness consensus is that a large aircraft of the type of Flight 77 struck the Pentagon, and there is a vast amount of other evidence supporting that. In fact, the evidence is completely conclusive without witness testimony.

Again, this is all elementary and should not need to be explained, but here we are, in a 9/11 thread where it seems to continually "fly over the heads" (sorry) of certain individuals

King Mob · 02-09-2020 12:31pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I can't believe this has to be spelled out but it does..

Witnesses, for an event that e.g. happens in a few seconds, can be individually unreliable when it comes to precise details. An individual witness can also be wrong, or change their story.

This is why investigators always look at the consensus of witnesses. Along with all the other corroborating information.

For example a couple of witnesses claim they saw a corporate jet. That doesn't mean "ZOMG offiCiaL NarRatIve FalSe, it Was ANoTher PlaNe", it means those two witnesses, from their viewpoints, and proximity, and their limited information saw what they believed was a smaller aircraft.

There is obviously no other evidence of a corporate jet being hijacked or striking the Pentagon. The witness consensus is that a large aircraft of the type of Flight 77 struck the Pentagon, and there is a vast amount of other evidence supporting that. In fact, the evidence is completely conclusive without witness testimony.

Again, this is all elementary and should not need to be explained, but here we are, in a 9/11 thread where it seems to continually "fly over the heads" (sorry) of certain individuals

Yup.
These guys aren't stupid either, so they realise this too.
They know they can't answer these issues. They know they can't answer the questions. That's why they avoid them.

I just don't get why someone would do that.
Why believe in something you know isn't true and you know you can't make sense of?

Cheerful Spring2 · 02-09-2020 12:47pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

It's an important piece of evidence. It's been examined (by experts and proper air crash investigators) and supports the fact that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

You, an internet lay-person, are trying to distort/twist the interpretation of the data in order to hint there's some discrepancy, in order to cast doubt on the event, in order to suggest some unspecified changeable conspiracy took place

There's no logic or reason or rational to that approach. You've decided the event is some sort of "conspiracy" in your head, and you keep trying to randomly discredit everything you can, in order to suggest "something else" happened. And as demonstrated you have zero interest in supporting that "something else"

My suspicion is the agencies investigating the crash, did not cooperate, share the same notes here and people who decoded the FDR might not have been aware of the information we examining here. It very remote the NTSB crowd would research back where the plane was at precise time and place? The saw Flight 77 heading to the Pentagon and that as far there mind would delve into the content?

How does one warp and twist a visual image? I uploaded a FAA video screenshot- the plane over the top of the Navy Annex flying a north path to the east. Do you think i have uploaded a fraudulent image here? You posting lot of waffle here to make it read like we are crazy ones here for discussing it

. But your posts are always like this so no surprise.

Invented a conspiracy? What have you provided to show the plane on the southside of the Navy Annex? We are pages in and still nothing to prove the official story correct.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 12:54pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Invented a conspiracy? What have you provided to show the plane on the southside of the Navy Annex? We are pages in and still nothing to prove the official story correct.

It's pages in and you guys haven't actually outlined your alternative story fully or coherently.
You yourself have changed your story completely at least 3 times now.

And most importantly you can't actually explain why the government would say the plane flew in on a different path.
You can't explain it. You know you can't explain it.

Cheerful Spring2 · 02-09-2020 1:07pm

Flight 77 flying to the left, and above the top of the Navy Annex on 9/11 "heading a northpath to the east"

The FAA/ Norad animation made after the decoded the FDR.

If this is an accurate animation, the plane can't be flight 77, since the US government plane flying over the top of a highway and houses to the far right side of the Navy Annex. In their description the plane nowhere near the Navy Annex building.

Green/turquoise line is the official flight path. The red dots around the building is the Navy Annex ( notice there no plane heading that way compare with the FDR!)
Yellow lines. Is where eyewitnesses said they saw the plane.
The FDR appears to confirm the yellow line eyewitnesses are right?

King Mob · 02-09-2020 1:12pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Flight 77 flying to the left, and above the top of the Navy Annex on 9/11 "heading a northpath to the east"

You keep posting this cheerful, but it doesn't help you. It doesn't address the central problem.

The government have no reason to say the plane flew in on a different path than it did.
It literally makes no sense. You know it makes no sense.

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 1:19pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

My suspicion is the agencies investigating the crash, did not cooperate

No one cares what your suspicions/beliefs are. There are people who suspect or believe the world is flat, it doesn't mean anything, its irrelevant.

What can be demonstrated with proper evidence?

For example, explain how the team that handled the forensic examination of the Pentagon, identifying the passengers and crew - how did they get it wrong?

Step by step from the ground up. Were they paid off? then explain who paid them with evidence. Did they not link the DNA correct? cool then demonstrate that with proper evidence

If you can't demonstrate it, then you are just making stuff up based on personal beliefs/suspicions

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 1:23pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

Explain what happened in this photo. Name the building in the photo, which face of the building is it, and what has just occurred according to you..

Why is there smoke coming out of it, etc..

King Mob · 02-09-2020 1:24pm

Yea Ruby random images with MSpaint all over it isn't going to be very convincing.
It also doesn't address any of the issues or questions you're running away from.
It doesn't solve the central problem. The government wouldn't lie about the flight path as they have no reason to.
It makes no sense for them to do so.
You know it makes zero sense, hence why you keep dodging the issue.

Cheerful Spring2 · 02-09-2020 1:25pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No one cares what your suspicions/beliefs are. There are people who suspect or believe the world is flat, it doesn't mean anything, its irrelevant.

What can be demonstrated with proper evidence?

For example, explain how the team that handled the forensic examination of the Pentagon, identifying the passengers and crew - how did they get it wrong?

Step by step from the ground up. Were they paid off? then explain who paid them with evidence. Did they not link the DNA correct? cool then demonstrate that with proper evidence

If you can't demonstrate it, then you are just making stuff up based on personal beliefs/suspicions

Still not getting it. If the airplane not on the path the US government says it was what else about the narrative is dubious.
You can’t have two airplanes at various spots heading to the Pentagon.

Ruby gray · 02-09-2020 1:25pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Flight 77 flying to the left, and above the top of the Navy Annex on 9/11 "heading a northpath to the east"

The FAA/ Norad animation made after the decoded the FDR.

If this is an accurate animation, the plane can't be flight 77, since the US government plane flying over the top of a highway and houses to the far right side of the Navy Annex. In their description the plane nowhere near the Navy Annex building.

Green/turquoise line is the official flight path. The red dots around the building is the Navy Annex ( notice there no plane heading that way compare with the FDR!)
Yellow lines. Is where eyewitnesses said they saw the plane.
The FDR appears to confirm the yellow line eyewitnesses are right?

Indeed!!
And there are many more eyewitnesses who can be proven to have seen the plane fly perpendicular to the west wall of the Pentagon, hundreds of metres away from that official flightpath which nobody ever did see.

Ruby gray · 02-09-2020 1:26pm

King Mob wrote: »

Yea Ruby random images with MSpaint all over it isn't going to be very convincing.
It also doesn't address any of the issues or questions you're running away from.
It doesn't solve the central problem. The government wouldn't lie about the flight path as they have no reason to.
It makes no sense for them to do so.
You know it makes zero sense, hence why you keep dodging the issue.

The synapses are clearly misfiring.
You have absolutely everything backwards.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 1:29pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

The synapses are clearly misfiring.
You have absolutely everything backwards.

Nope. You're just avoiding the question because you can't answer it.

You know you can't answer it. You know it's a major issue for your conspiracy beliefs.
Everyone else know it too.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 1:30pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Still not getting it. If the airplane not on the path the US government says it was what else about the narrative is dubious.
You can’t have two airplanes at various spots heading to the Pentagon.

Cheerful, the "north" path is the one you guys have been claiming is the "real one."

The official flight path is to the south of that.

Again, I think this is a result of you not understanding something basic like compass directions and how to correctly say them.

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 1:31pm

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Still not getting it.

You just claimed there was multiple aircraft or another aircraft from flight 77

What is your evidence there was multiple aircraft?

What is your evidence there was "another" aircraft?

To make things even more incredible, you've spent months and months stating, as fact, that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Yet here you are agreeing with someone who claims a plane didn't hit the Pentagon.

Which is it?

Is it Shrodingers plane, it both missed the Pentagon and hit the Pentagon?

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 1:32pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

And again, what is this building and what has just happened to it?

Ruby gray · 02-09-2020 1:56pm

Many people know that there were several eyewitnesses at the CITGO GAS STATION who saw the plane flying to the NORTH of the station, on a flightpath absolutely irrecooncilable with the government's story which claims the plane flew across the Columbia Pike overpass bridge.

Citizen Investigation Team interviewed three of these witnesses on video -

PPO Sergeant William Lagasse

PPO Sergeant Chadwick Brooks

CITGO employee Robert Turcios.

Most people are unaware that there was another significant, identifiable eyewitness there, on the opposite sideof the gas pump where Lagasse was.

This was STATE TROOPER MYRLIN WIMBISH.

His location is positively confirmed on the CCTV footage.

Wimbish testified that he was at the gas pump facing west, when he saw the plane flying directly towards him over the Navy Annex.

As the plane was flying past, the sun reflected off its silver fuselage, southwest onto Wimbish's car, and up onto the ceiling under the canopy. This was caught in a frame of the video.

We then immediately see Wimbish's car pull away, and also the cashier staff rushing to the door. They had testified that the building shook from the noise as the plane flew over, and they ran to see what was happening.

About 20 seconds later, after he had radioed the Pentagon, Lagasse reversed out of the station and headed to the Pentagon.

Wimbish was not an eyewitness to a plane impact. He was facing the wrong direction.

But he was absolutely a NORTH OF CITGO EYEWITNESS.

King Mob · 02-09-2020 1:59pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

Many people know...

And now we've entered the stage where you're just going to ignore any dissenting though or questions and will only regurgitate factoids you have learned from conspiracy websites.

Why do this when you know your conspiracy doesn't make any sense and you can neither explain it or defend it?

Dohnjoe · 02-09-2020 2:11pm

Ruby gray wrote: »

Many people know that there were many eyewitnesses at the CITGO GAS STATION who saw the plane flying to the NORTH of the station, on a flightpath absolutely irrecooncilable with the government's story which claims the plane flew across the Columbia Pike overpass bridge.

Many people don't know. Why? because this flight path and selective quoting and perceptions of witnesses is a niche denial of events created entirely by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

These 911 conspiracy theorists can't answer basic questions on their theory, can't provide proper evidence, they can't even describe the theory in any detail, sound familiar?

It's simply an exercise in playing "he said, she said" with witness statements for no other reason that to muddy the waters in order to hint that something else, unspecified, must have happened

I'll ask again but you keep avoiding basic questions

1. How many witnesses saw the plane flying over the Pentagon?

and

2. What happened to this plane that allegedly flew over the Pentagon? what happened to the Pentagon?

Remember this is the equivalent of someone playing with witness/survivor statements about the Titanic in order to fabricate perceived contradictions in order to state that it didn't hit an iceberg... and then never answering a single question about that theory

King Mob · 02-09-2020 2:27pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Many people don't know. Why? because this flight path and selective quoting and perceptions of witnesses is a niche denial of events created entirely by 9/11 conspiracy theorists.

And AFAIR, these pictures are from a crowd who are arguing that it was a missile that hit the pentagon. Something which cheerful has denied previously and described as crazy.
Not sure if that's something ruby subscribes to, as they have not been very open or forthcoming about their beliefs for some reason.

Also I'm not sure if that conspiracy crowd also subscribe to the notion of holographic planes, but their images sure are used a lot by those who do...

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

Comments