[Moderated]Gravy's witness "summary" does not reflect reality.

[HyJinX]

He told us that he did NOT see the light poles get hit and merely deduced it from seeing the poles on the ground after the fact.

Can you please provide a transcript or a video of your conversation where he says he did not see the pole(s) being hit? I'm sure you're a trustworthy fella, but as it stands now...we'd need to just take your word for it...which I'm not comfortable doing.

Thanks,
HyJinX

 

[jaydeehess]

No. You know that.

It is based on the North side flight path,

which 3 of many witnesses say occured

the pull up over the highway,

Which only One witness of many says occured
the description of the plane not being an AA,
few say "not AA" several say white which is not all that different than silver

the accounts of a "second" plane jet chasing/shadowing along the same flight path and veering off over the pentagon at the time of the explosion

,
no reason to believe that the 'shadowing" is a close in virtual formation flying and every reason to expect that this is the result of several people seeing the C-130 overhead.

911 calls reporting the crash on the other side of the Pentagon, 911 calls being confiscated and sequestered,

Pure speculation that any of these calls might contain something that Lyte could use for a flyover senario

reporter on scene stating one witness said the plane "went to the side of the building and not directly in"

Big frickin' deal. It went in.

and "the pilot tried to avert going directly in",

The aircraft hit at an angle and most people's belief would be that no one would hit a building on purpose

reports of a "light white jet circling the helipad",

C-130 overhead

 

[twinstead]

No. You know that.

It is based on the North side flight path, the pull up over the highway, the description of the plane not being an AA, the accounts of a "second" plane jet chasing/shadowing along the same flight path and veering off over the pentagon at the time of the explosion, 911 calls reporting the crash on the other side of the Pentagon, 911 calls being confiscated and sequestered, reporter on scene stating one witness said the plane "went to the side of the building and not directly in" and "the pilot tried to avert going directly in", reports of a "light white jet circling the helipad", amongst other things.

There you go again using the old double standard to somehow make your 'evidence' seem like the only 'real evidence', and all the other 'evidence' is suspect.

By the way, that list that 1337m4n posted is pretty compelling. You can spin all you want, but 'hypothetically speaking' of course, if indeed these are accurate representations of what these people say they saw, how do you explain them?

 

[beachnut]

Isn't the entire flyover theory based on pure speculation?

Lyte made it up with help from JDX at p4t. A total fabrication to sell videos at 15 bucks. They are 9/11 profiteers on the backs of delusional conspiracy theorist who are too dumb to understand physics, flight and have zero capabilities to think logically or rationally.

Lyte has made it up, and he even thinks his own star witnesses were in on a cover-up. I wonder what Brooks will think when I show him the posts by Lyte saying he is a liar for the government. Brook even said in 2001 he saw Flight 77 hit the light posts and the Pentagon. Yet the CIT team at the Pentacon has made up this lie and is selling DVDs to idiots.

 

[Lyte Trip]

Can you please provide a transcript or a video of your conversation where he says he did not see the pole(s) being hit? I'm sure you're a trustworthy fella, but as it stands now...we'd need to just take your word for it...which I'm not comfortable doing.

Thanks,
HyJinX

Sure, when RE comes out.

 

[Lyte Trip]

which 3 of many witnesses say occured

5. Levi Stephens makes 5. Just ask them, if they were really there and aare genuine witnesses, they will tell you the same thing dear.

Which only One witness of many says occured

Skarlet also believed it did. Robert is the only one in that position to make that definitive visual.

the description of the plane not being an AA,
few say "not AA" several say white which is not all that different than silver

We have more. Levi Stephens just told us without a doubt it did not look like an AA nor was it an AA.
,

no reason to believe that the 'shadowing" is a close in virtual formation flying and every reason to expect that this is the result of several people seeing the C-130 overhead.

Uh yeah it is. We've interviewed Kieth Wheelhouse dear. We know the C-130's path and interaction with the plane.

Pure speculation that any of these calls might contain something that Lyte could use for a flyover senario

Really? Even though 911 callers were placing the plane crash on the other side of the Pentagon?

Big frickin' deal. It went in.

No it went to the side of the building and not directly in.

The aircraft hit at an angle and most people's belief would be that no one would hit a building on purpose

Um ok.

C-130 overhead

The C-130 was a gunmetal grey four propeller engine plane. Not a light white jet.

 

[Lyte Trip]

and all the other 'evidence' is suspect.

Uh yeah, that's how we got here. The "evidence" is the crime. It's what we've been questioning, it's what we didn't buy.

 

[1337m4n]

Sure, when RE comes out.

Ah yes. The fabled Researcher's Edition, which is supposed to be the biggest thing and will completely blow the official story away.

Lemme ask all you JREF regulars: How many time have you heard the following, or a variation thereof, from a conspiracy theorist, group, or website:

"COMING SOON: A shocking and compelling new documentary that will TOTALLY blow the official story away! It will be unlike ANY 9/11 documentary you've ever seen: this one will once and for all conclusively prove the official story to be a lie. There will be no denying the inside job once this documentary comes out. And when it hits the American people, they will rise up and rebel, take it to the media, the courts, and expose the 9/11 lie and destroy the evil government!

For the next 18 months we will continue to advertise this video as 'coming soon'.

All we want is the truth. We do not seek profit.

Checks or money orders. Plus shipping and handling. $29.95 per DVD."

 

[celestrin]

I see you're still harping on no one seeing light poles getting hit, Lyte? What dirt have you dug up on Mr. Milburn then? Why is he wrong when he says the plane flew above him and clipped the poles? What about Mr. Keglovich? Sure, he doesn't mention the poles, he says the plane clipped the taxicab itself. Why would he say that, if the plane was pulling up, way above the poles and the Pentagon? Oh, I get it, there are no quote marks in the article, so it was the reporter who made the whole thing up!

What about Mr. Ockershausen? Oh, I see, it's a 3rd person account and even if it wasn't, there would be some conflict of interest, I'm sure. Speaking of conflict of interest, what did WMAL radio say when you wanted to get the tape of their 9/11 morning program when multiple Pentagon eyewitnesses were calling in? Did you contact any other radio for potencial footage?

Why didn't Mr. Leonard, Mr. Gaskins, Mr. Thompson, Mr. Renzi or Ms. "Barbara", all located up on I395, with Pentagon upper sections in sight, see your Plane-of-the-North flying over the Pentagon?

Why didn't Mr. Robbins or Mr. Snaman? They were located on the other side of the Potomac, with clear view of the Pentagon and any possible flyover path. No, they were not able to see the impact itself, since the Pentagon was in the way, but they had seen the plane, they had seen it disappear behind the building and then they had seen the explosion. Where did the plane go? Why hadn't your plane appeared?

Why didn't Mr. Wright see it from his location? Surely the dastardly flyover coverup illusion setup, orchestrated for Washington Blvrd/CITGO witnesses, wouldn't work on him, as he was located up to the north. Is it possible that he didn't see it flyover, because he was busy watching it crash into the Pentagon? You know, just as he later described it?

Why didn't the Freedom Forum employees see the flyover? Is it because some of them actually saw it crash into the Pentagon?

And did you find out what piece of a flyover plane trapped Mrs. Hortum in her car?

Hey, just axing questions, dude.

 

[pomeroo]

Uh yeah, that's how we got here. The "evidence" is the crime. It's what we've been questioning, it's what we didn't buy.

And we won't buy your bogus DVD.

There are no--ZERO--witnesses to a flyover.

You're done.

 

[pomeroo]

Edited by Miss Anthrope: 

Incivility removed

So what are the plans for your Rationalist's Radventrure to Arlington to debunk the PentaCon. To find to the witnesses to the impact.

I found the perfect mode of transportation for you and Gravy.

http://cache.jalopnik.com/assets/resources/2006/12/bug_camper.jpg

Refrain from personal attacks!

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Miss Anthrope

The PentaCon has been as thoroughly debunked as, well, all the other nonsense conspiracy liars invent.

Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. Wreckage and human remains prove that it did.

There are no--ZERO--witnesses to your imaginary flyover.

It's over for you, Lyte.

 

[twinstead]

Uh yeah, that's how we got here. The "evidence" is the crime. It's what we've been questioning, it's what we didn't buy.

Yea, but you 'don't buy it' not because it's not valid evidence, you don't buy it because it contradicts your theory.

The ONLY way you can claim the evidence collected--it is otherwise very compelling and destroys your whole claim--is by claiming it was faked.

You don't know how. You don't know who. You have no witnesses or evidence WHATSOEVER to prove it, but it just HAS to be planted because YOUR evidence is so rock-solid real.

Right?

 

[LashL]

<snip>Lemme ask all you JREF regulars: How many time have you heard the following, or a variation thereof, from a conspiracy theorist, group, or website:

"COMING SOON: A shocking and compelling new documentary that will TOTALLY blow the official story away! It will be unlike ANY 9/11 documentary you've ever seen: this one will once and for all conclusively prove the official story to be a lie. There will be no denying the inside job once this documentary comes out. And when it hits the American people, they will rise up and rebel, take it to the media, the courts, and expose the 9/11 lie and destroy the evil government!</snip>

Far too often. Twoofers seem to have a knack for spouting nonsense, but they all follow the same pattern. Smoking gun!!111eleventy!!11 Never before seen!!111eleventy!!11 Airtight proof of the eeeevil conspiracy!!111eleventy!!11 Buy my dvd!!111eleventy!!11.

They are just like other subsets of woo: faith healers, dowsers, homeopaths, psychics, spooon benders, etc. They are all cut from the same cloth, and all roads lead quickly to their attempts to line their pockets as a result of whichever form of woo they are selling.

 

[Belz...]

The number of people who witnessed a large 30 ft light pole spear it's way into Lloyd England's taxi cab while he spins out sideways remains at ZERO.

Even if that were true, Lyte, it wouldn't prove anything about your own theory.

Incidently, how are those four witnesses doing ?

 

[Belz...]

No. You know that.

It is based on the North side flight path, the pull up over the highway, the description of the plane not being an AA, the accounts of a "second" plane jet chasing/shadowing along the same flight path and veering off over the pentagon at the time of the explosion, 911 calls reporting the crash on the other side of the Pentagon, 911 calls being confiscated and sequestered, reporter on scene stating one witness said the plane "went to the side of the building and not directly in" and "the pilot tried to avert going directly in", reports of a "light white jet circling the helipad", amongst other things.

So witnesses seeing the plane impact the Pentagon are no good, but witnesses seeing something that you think supports a 'flyover' is ?

 

[A W Smith]

Lyte you have shown no physical evidence for a flyover or north of citgo flight path. You have shown not a single Flyover witness even though there is a huge parking lot behind the pentagon for potential flyover witnesses.

Lyte your fantasy is done You have proven nothing.

.

 

[Gravy]

Edited by Cleon: 

Gravy, please do not substitute poster's names with personal insults.

The number of people who witnessed a large 30 ft light pole spear it's way into Lloyd England's taxi cab while he spins out sideways remains at ZERO.

I wonder if Craig Ranke will ever guess which witness directly refutes his claim. I wonder.

 

[boloboffin]

I wonder if Craig Ranke will ever guess which witness directly refutes his claim. I wonder.

I already brought this up, Gravy. Lyte simply sneered at what a "critical thinker" I was. It made me chuckle.

 

[Lyte Trip]

Lyte you have shown no physical evidence for a flyover or north of citgo flight path. You have shown not a single Flyover witness even though there is a huge parking lot behind the pentagon for potential flyover witnesses.

Lyte your fantasy is done You have proven nothing.

Go to the Pentagon parking lots from 6:30 to 7:am and they are like Grand Central Station.

At 9:38 they are completely full of empty cars and it's as quiet as a church.

I know because I've been there at those times. Have you?

However certainly it's possible that somebody saw the plane quickly fly away after the explosion.

That's why they confiscated the 911 calls and made sure there was a 2nd plane cover story.

We have proven the plane flew on the north side of the citgo.

I'm sorry that the implications of this are too difficult for you to accept.

 

[Gravy]

I already brought this up, Gravy. Lyte simply sneered at what a "critical thinker" I was. It made me chuckle.

Oh, I didn't see that. Well played.