| Welcome to Pumpitout. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Absurdity of the Flyover?; ...how about that official path?!?!? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 4 2010, 12:35 PM (461 Views) | |
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 4 2010, 12:35 PM Post #1 |
|
Hey Broken Sticks,If there is no motive for the flyover, what is the motive for the official flight path?You geniuses completely remove the the official flight path from context and try to make the flyover look ludicrous when there is more evidence and logic for the flyover than the official flight path. So let's get it straight. You think the hijacker or the remote controllers would approach the pentagon while being considered an unidentified target after two planes hit the towers, then turn away from the Pentagon (instead of diving into it from the top) to make a long time consuming loop, leaving them vulnerable to interceptor jets (because they don't know when or if they are coming) and instead of diving from the top the make this slow turn to then fly treetop level to hopefully line up with the Pentagon (which they really can't see) To then avoid the multiple obstacles leading up to two main obstacles being the Sheraton and the VDOT tower to then miss those @ 530 mph and then magically beyond the physical laws of aeronautics dip down, level off to conveniently and oh so accurately miss the VDOT camera mast and overhead sign, then thread itself through 5 light poles without wrecking the wings spilling fuel or debris and impeding a successful impact. The pilot or controller didn 't worry about wrecking before the wall or doing what it should have done which is crash onto the lawn due to obstacles and topography. After that, it would be over the lawn and now flying through trailers to then flying into the GROUND FLOOR of the Pentagon! Do you realize how absurd that all sounds when you take a step back and PUT IT and KEEP IT in context? What was the motive for all that? What kind of sense does that make? You want motive for the flyover? Control of their own area, accuracy in what area they wanted destroyed, more predictability, damage contained within a specific area, because a modified passenger jet with no passengers will be a tell tale sign an AA plane did not hit, because they could get away with it due to the Big Lie technique, influence in the media and the general psy-op of two planes hitting the towers in apparent terrorist attacks right before a plane approached the Pentagon when at the same time a GIGANTIC fireball/explosion goes off.The fact is no one has refuted the NoC witnesses nor have you people trumped Pilots for 9/11 Truth with your inane, unprofessional, deceptive analyses. It is clear the plane flew NoC which means no poles were hit, the pentagon wasn't hit, and data and grainy video surveillance frames were faked/manipulated.Either Shure is being manipulated by handlers, he is an op himself, or is just plain not all together upstairs. Edited by Jeff_Shill, Aug 4 2010, 01:08 PM.
|
 |
 
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 4 2010, 12:57 PM Post #2 |
|
Let's not forget that they have useful idiots like the ones here and the cointel here and elsewhere. Jeff, how come you go from discredting the movement with your drunken calls to a witness and no plane bull**** to being this bastion of 9/11 truth by attacking real researchers, their research and findings, and tainting witnesses without applying any type of forensic or investigative effort to get details nailed down? Hmmm. It was just "oh yeah you say u saw the plane hit? Well there are these guys going around saying it flew over". Do you realize how stupid u sounded leading all those witnesses? You didn't debunk anything and neither did they. You realize that right? Your attempt to debunk backfired BECAUSE of how you handled the calls, Jeff. They couldn't even describe HOW the plane hit ESPECIALLY considering it can't hit on the south approach due to topography, obstacles AND THE LAST ALTITUDE ENTRY FROM THE ALLEGED AA77 BLACK BOX THEY ALLEGEDLY FOUND IN THE PENTAGON!!! We already know it can't hit on the north side approach. But you don't worry aboot that ay, Jeff? Why don't you release ALL your calls pertaining to CIT and the Pentagon attack witnesses and ALLEGED witnesses? Edited by Jeff_Shill, Aug 4 2010, 01:38 PM.
|
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Aug 4 2010, 01:59 PM Post #3 |
|
Jeff_Shill: you missed the most obvious possibility: the plane flew SoC, entered the so-called damage path, and then impacted the Pentagon. And a lot of people saw it hit the Pentagon. Have a nice day, Debs |
|
|
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 4 2010, 02:13 PM Post #4 |
|
Well no my assholish friend. Explain how that is possible when it is not possible.Not possible on the SoC path or NoC path. Jeff is this how you tackle real issues that pose problems to your kingdom of idiocy and deception? Move the thread? What followers you do have will notice how you avoided this thread and just moved it. |
|
|
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 4 2010, 02:18 PM Post #5 |
|
Wow. And guests can't even view this thread can they?! Scared huh? I hit all the right buttons huh Jeff. So u are an op. Canadian Intelligence? I can see that now. So do u want to admit it now that guests aren't watching now? |
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Aug 4 2010, 02:58 PM Post #6 |
|
Jeff didn't move this thread -- I did. You may rant in the Drama Club all you wish. The research section of this board is for research. You may wish to re-evaluate your manners, as well. tgc, Debs |
|
|
|
| thepye | Aug 4 2010, 03:41 PM Post #7 |
|
Nice,,a paranoid conspiracy person. OP? You fool!... Ya, it's a big psy-op against you and your buddies! You think you backed Jeff into a corner, by exposing his cover? Get a life you fuckin loser! |
|
|
|
| broken sticks | Aug 4 2010, 06:28 PM Post #8 |
|
hi!  hitting the pentagon nice and low. possibly for minimum casualties. i guess you haven't looked into 911 much. there's no evidence of a flyover. try looking into 911. what interceptor jets? there was no shoot-down order until well after all planes had been destroyed. no, it didn't thread itself through anything - it knocked down the lightpoles. fuel can be seen coming out of the wings in the security video, and penny elgas found some debris. try looking into 911 just a teensy bit. maybe you'll find a witness to a flyover? because there are many witnesses to the plane impacting the pentagon. i guess you think you'd have been fooled by a flyover.... if so, do you think the explosion happened precisely as the plane passed over the wall's edge? or before, and the plane flew through the explosion? try listening to some witnesses. and do a little bit of research or something. have a nice day!
|
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Aug 4 2010, 07:46 PM Post #9 |
|
Well done, sticks! |
|
|
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 5 2010, 02:58 AM Post #10 |
|
Why the f*** should anyone listen to what comes out of that twat you call a mouth or in this case, that mound of ground beef you call a brain? You follow Jeff f*** Hill. That says nothing for your credibility. I mean have you noticed a pattern here? This f*** man douche thing starts calling people and doesn't even know what to ask them, attaches his name to PFT, harasses Val Mc Clatchey, gets interviewed by a PA paper where he admits having mental problems and being on medication, promotes no planes, THEN out of nowhere turns on no planes and starts attacking CIT and their research. He starts calling witnesses and turning them against CIT while looking for the words "saw" and "impact" without applying ANY forensic/investigative questioning or scrutiny to their accounts. Think about is a**hole, he taints witnesses and biases them. He ruins ANY opportunity of getting a detailed account that isn't tainted by flyover or staged light pole talk. Are you dumb? Have you heard his calls. He actually ruins it for impact proponents AND flyover proponents. What would you think? I see someone who is purposefully damaging first to the movement, then to the guys to bring the first real evidence proving an inside job. That sounds like an op with being fed different missions. He is like Shayler in reverse. Starts out a kook turns into a respected truth figure or "researcher". Anyway, yeah, we all know I could be wrong, but we also know I could be right. Covers for intelligence operatives or assets range from the obvious to the wtf. They are not all smooth James Bond types, some are alcoholics and drug addicts who are sloppy and whose handlers let run wild so long as they complete the mission. Just you know, I typed all that for Jeff and for the thinking. You just came along for the ride. |
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Aug 5 2010, 03:37 AM Post #11 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 5 2010, 03:39 AM Post #12 |
|
No I have researched 9/11 a lot longer than you, you 19 year old little punk. Don't talk condascending to me. Hitting the Pentagon nice and low. Listen to you. Yeah that makes sense. I like how you avoided everything else I typed though. Why the f*** would you risk hitting the Pentagon "nice and low" when you can hit it from the top and when it means you risk the chance of wrecking the plane before the wall? U like your lame little presentation make no sense. There is plenty of evidence for a flyover. Don't you research 9/11? Furthermore weren't you the same little tag along that was a CIT follower? Were YOU following THEIR research first? But no, I know some 19 year old punk kid has it all figured out. Interceptor jets. As in the remote controller aka the hijacker made an unecessary turn that exposes it as a move a hijacker WOULD NOT make. Understand? We of course know it was by design and they had no worries about interceptor jet, but clearly you miss my point. So your dumb ass conspiracy theory is that it really was AA77 with real passengers but it got hijcked by remote control? Does shure the durrrr concur? He is so all over the place switching sides(like John Farmer) you don't even know what he "believes" do you? Yes a**hole, thread itself through the light poles. It passed the VDOT camera mast and Overhead sign to thread itself through the light poles supposedly making it intact to the wall. Penny Elgas can't even keep story straight about how she got the piece debris, so you better drop that one. Debris could have been blown from the trailer areas where it would have been planted. You don't got witnesses to an impact. You got people who say they saw it hit. None corroborate the same details, s*** you don't even have details. And you certainly don't have any in a position to see the flightpath in relation to the gas station saying on camera, on location, with drawing that "yup, I saw the plane come right here on the south side of the gas station and hit that first pole right there". You got s*** and CIT isn't going anywhere. |
|
|
|
| Jeff_Shill | Aug 5 2010, 03:42 AM Post #13 |
|
Yougene, if you aren't the biggest b**** of a cheerleader. Why not get the pom poms and the outfit? Just tell everyone who you work for. It will make things so much easier. You are so f*** obvious dude. |
|
|
|
| YougeneDebs | Aug 5 2010, 03:47 AM Post #14 |
|
|
|
|
|
| broken sticks | Aug 5 2010, 06:36 AM Post #15 |
|
hehe sweet - get a fresh bag from the lobby debs.... |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Drama Club · Next Topic » |
12:40 PM Jul 13