[Moderated] So What Would You Think If This Were True?

[milesalpha]

Just a heads up on this one, facts are not based on personal opinion. Facts are agreed upon as true by a quorum of individuals educated in the matter. They are referencable, traceable pieces of information open to scrutiny by parties other than those presenting them. You have information that you refuse to allow people to evaluate on the rather childish notion that everyone should accept its importance and veracity solely on the strength of your convictions.

Sorry but you are obviously using the antiquated, government sponsored, sheeple version of "fact". For 9-11, "fact" refers to any photo or video you can google, stare at for half an hour, then apply your lack of education to in order to conjure an a point than cannnot be verified by anyone with an IQ over 90.

 

[The Almond]

Just a heads up, no personal opinion involved.

Then produce the evidence and subject it to scrutiny.

 

[uk_dave]

I still think that the most explosive revelation these guys will be serving up is their explanation for how these credible and varifiable witnesses have failed to present their evidence for the last five years.

But, I'm sure sceptic and trippy have have got that covered....right guys?

 

[~enigma~]

Translation: What we have atm isn't evidence but with plenty of editing and dubbing we can eventually make it look like we do have some.

Took an awfully long time for someone to figure this out or did everyone know this but was afraid to hurt s4s's feelings?

 

[uk_dave]

Well sceptic is already teasing us with what appears to be a 'work in progress' showing that not only was the plane travelling north of citgo, but also that it was moving slow enough for the pilot to read the 'do not enter' sign indicated on his graphic and that the pilot then managed to pull the plane up at this point .... just as a split in the space time continuum appeared above the newly refurbished wing of the pentagon and the plane disappeared into this split, to reappear several years in the past in an eric von dainekan fantasy.

The actual damage to the pentagon remains unexplained as is still the subject of feverish clue getting by the hardly...i mean, elite pentagon research team.

 

[Crungy]

This sounds very familiar. Isn't there a Flight 77 thread that relates this psychological phenomena? Can someone clue me in?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/memory.htm

The first psychological issue with witness testimony is "perception" — the question of whether external events are copied into memory accurately. The second is "memory" — the issue of whether initial perceptions, accurate or inaccurate, remain unchanged in the mind.
If human perception is questionable, human memory is at least equally questionable.

The tempting simple assumption is that people have "Flashbulb Memory." That just as a flashbulb fires and imprints an image permanently on film, an event is emblasioned on human memory and remains there unchanged. Alas, that's not the case.

In the first place, people can "remember" things that they could not have possibly seen. One example comes from Daniel Schacter's book Seven Sins of Memory, and concerns the 1992 crash of an El Al cargo plane into an apartment building in the Netherlands.

People throughout the country saw, read, heard, and talked about the catastrophe.
Ten months later a group of Dutch psychologists probed what members of their university communities remembered about the crash. The researchers asked a simple question: "Did you see the television film of the moment the plane hit the apartment building?" Fifty-five percent of respondents said "yes." In a follow-up study, two-thirds of the participants responded affirmatively.

They also recalled details concerning the speed and angle of the plane as it hit the building, whether it was on fire prior to impact, and what happened to the body of the plane right after the collision. These finding are remarkable because there was no television film of the moment when the plane actually crashed.
The psychologists had asked a blatantly suggestive question: they implied that television film of the crash had been shown. Respondents may have viewed television footage of the postcrash scene, and they probably read, imagined, or talked about what might have happened at the moment of impact. Spurred on by the suggestive question, participants misattributed information from these or other sources to a film that they never watched. [p. 112]

I wonder what type of raging clues these Hardly Boyz would have gotten if they were born 40 years earlier....What happened to the dog and all of those damn firecrackers?!


Jean Hill. "The President and his wife were looking at a little dog on the seat between them as I looked down on them"

J.C. Price. "There was a volley of shots, I think five and then much later, maybe as much as five minutes later another one. I saw one man run towards the passenger cars on the railroad siding after the volley of shots. This man had a white dress shirt, no tie and kahki colored trousers. His hair appeared to be long and dark and his agility running could be about 25 years of age. He had something in his hand. I couldn't be sure, but it may have been a head piece."

Sam Holland. "After the first shot the President slumped over and Mrs. Kennedy jumped up and tried to get over in the back seat to him and then the second shot rang out. After the first shot the secret service man raised up in the seat with a machine guy then dropped back down in the seat. And they immediately sped off. Everything is spinning in my head and if I remember anything else later I will come back and tell Bill."

Bill Newman. "We were standing at the edge of the curb looking at the car as it was coming toward us and all of a sudden there was a noise, apparently gunshot. The President jumped up in his seat, and it looked like what I thought was a firecracker had went off adn I thought he had realized it. It was just like an explosion and he was standing up. By this time he was directly in front of us and I was looking directly at him when he was hit in the side of the head. Then he fell back Governor Connally was holding his middle section."

Austin Miller when asked if recognized the first shot. "I didn't know it. At thought at first the motorcyle backfired or somebody had thrown some firecrackers out."

Jack Franzen. "He said he heard the sound of an explosion which appeared to him to come from the President's car an noticed small fragments flying inside the care and immediately assumed someone had tossed a firecracker inside the automobile. He noticed the men, who were presumed to be secret service agents, riding in the car directly behind the President's car, unloading from the car, some with firearms in their hands.."

Marvin Chism. "The President's wife immediately stood over him, and she pulled him up, and lay him down in the seat, and she stood up over him in the car. The President was standing and waving and smiling at the people when the shot happened. . . . The two men in the front of the car stood up, and then when the second shot was fired, they all fell down and the car took off just like that."

A.J. Millican. "Just after the President's car passed, I heard three shots come from up toward Houston and Elm right by the Book Depository Building, and then immediately I heard two more shots come from the Arcade between the Book Store and the Underpass, and then three more shots came from the same direction only sounded further back."

"A man standing on the South side of Elm Street, was either hit in the foot, or the ankle and fell down."

James Simmons. "A motorcycle cop drove up the grassy slope toward the Texas School Book Depository Building, jumped off his motorcycle and then ran up the hill toward the Memorial Arches."

Nolan Potter. Nolan says that he noticed a policeman drive his motorcycle up the slope towards the Texas School Book Depository Building

Sam Holland. Sam also said a motorcycle cop "tried to ride up the embankment on his motorcycle and it tuned over about halfway up the embankment.

Lee Bowers. "A cop rode a motorcycle up the incline coming up from the lower portion of Elm Street, and he rode perhaps two-thirds of the way up or more before he deserted his motorcycle."

The cop in question, Clay Haygood speaks.

Mr. HAYGOOD. When I first got to the location there, I was still on Houston Street, and in the process of making a left turn onto Elm Street I could see all these people laying on the ground there on Elm. Some of them were pointing back up to the railroad yard, and a couple of people were headed back up that way, and I immediately tried to jump the north curb there in the 400 block, which was too high for me to get over.
Mr. BELIN. You mean with your motorcycle?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. HAYGOOD. And I left my motor on the street and ran to the railroad yard.

 

[Roger_Harris]

I hope this will prepare you to watch your world crumble before your very eyes.

 

[Pardalis]

it was moving slow enough for the pilot to read the 'do not enter' sign indicated on his graphic and that the pilot then managed to pull the plane up at this point .... just as a split in the space time continuum appeared above the newly refurbished wing of the pentagon and the plane disappeared into this split

And the scary thing about this is that it all makes perfect sense to them!

 

[Bell]

Slanderous, reachy scumbag.


Keep reaching, Tinkerbell.

And saying all the wittnesses who actually saw AA77 fly by and hit the Pentagon are 'in on it' is not slander? You're a dirty little hypocrite!

 

[chipmunk stew]

I hope this will prepare you to watch your world crumble before your very eyes.

http://opendb.com/images/jdx2.jpg

Earth-shattering!

 

[WildCat]

When it's time.

I predict it will never be the right time.

 

[Pardalis]

So, a recap:

According to the "new evidence' we have yet to be shown, some plane flew very low and passed by the Citgo station (its North side, as some witnesses seem to indicate, five years after the events). Apparently, this plane was intent to ram into the Pentagon, but at the last second, it pulled up, missed the building and somehow disappeared. Then, by some means unkown to us at this point, government operatives "staged" an explosion and damage at the Pentagon and to lightpoles according to an alternate flight plan, as if a plane had came in from the South of the Citgo station. The Citgo station seem to have been the pivotal element to this whole plot. Of course, this covert operation was perfectly executed, in record time and without any of the witnesses noticing it (the very same witnesses who saw the plane coming in and other innocent bystanders).

Is that pretty much it Lyte, or S4S?

 

[uk_dave]

Isn't CITGO owned by a government which also belongs to the UN?

Hmmmmmmmmm

 

[Pardalis]

What does CITGO stand for anyways? Is it an acronym?

I tell you, the Citgo station is at the center of all of this...

 

[stateofgrace]

So, a recap:

According to the "new evidence' we have yet to be shown, some plane flew very low and passed by the Citgo station (its North side, as some witnesses seem to indicate, five years after the events). Apparently, this plane was intent to ram into the Pentagon, but at the last second, it pulled up, missed the building and somehow disappeared. Then, by some means unkown to us at this point, government operatives "staged" an explosion and damage at the Pentagon and to lightpoles according to an alternate flight plan, as if a plane had came in from the South of the Citgo station. The Citgo station seem to have been the pivotal element to this whole plot. Of course, this covert operation was perfectly executed, in record time and without any of the witnesses noticing it (the very same witnesses who saw the plane coming in and other innocent bystanders).

Is that pretty much it Lyte, or S4S?

I can’t speak for Tripper and Skeptic but I think you about summed it up. It’s absolutely brilliant plan and I can see the planners fall over themselves to authorize it.

Planner À `so that’s the plan guys (see above), any questions? ´

Planner B ´Sounds good, when do we go, sometime during the night so nobody will see it happen?

Planner A `Absolutely not, that is what everybody will expect. We do it in broad daylight in full view of everybody´

Planner B `Brilliant, we are sure to get away with it´

 

[rwguinn]

Oh sometime before Xmas, just in time to get their DVD’s on the go.

Maybe they will offer a buy one get one free deal.

After all they are not profiteering, they are serious researchers.

No, no NO!
They have to wait for Santa to bring them some blank DVD's, cuz mommy won't buy 'em any, and they blew their allowance on chocolate...

 

[T.A.M.]

If your evidence is irrefutable, solid, without any room for debate, than why does it need to be "processed" or "made presentable". Why must the entire world wait for it for weeks while you "manipulate" it.

I know why. Because if you had to provide the data to honest, legitimate experts, without placing your "slant" or "context" on it, it would be trashed immediately.

Well I am willing to bet that no matter how much "preparation" the data goes under, it will still be torn up.

As for apologies. The only time I am issuing an apology, is the day the PNAC come out and say...ya we did it. Since they didn't do it, and there is no evidence to prove it, I can safely say no apology is coming from these lips.

TAM

 

[ihaunter]

Just a heads up, no personal opinion involved.

FYI:
Your claim that this evidence is bulletproof is an opinion as you have not released the raw data (video) for independent verification. You can not know for certain how your evidence stands up to scrutiny until it is scrutinized.

 

[Dazed]

So, a recap:
Apparently, this plane was intent to ram into the Pentagon, but at the last second, it pulled up, missed the building and somehow disappeared.

Somehow? Somehow??

Read about the Philadelphia Experiment, NOOB.

 

[jhunter1163]

See the parallel thread re: the Doubletree video. There was no flyover. The video shows that.

That sound you heard was Lyte and S4S smacking their heads and saying "D'oh!" in unison.