Sat01092016

Last update07:36:08 PM

Back Forum Personen Desinformanten "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 16:39 #748

  • stefanlebkon
  • stefanlebkon's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 762
  • Thank you received: 1
  • Karma: 2
"Die Controller von der zivilen Flugaufsicht vom Reagan Flughafen, der weniger als 1 Meile vom Pentagon entfernt liegt, beobachteten das Passagierflugzeug, wie es zum Pentagon flog und dort explodierte."

Nö, eigentlich nicht:

"He watched it flying a full circle and disappearing behind a building in nearby Crystal City, before crashing into the Pentagon"

Das Flugzeug VERSCHWAND AUS DER SICHT hinter einem Gebäude, anschließend sa h er nur einen Feuerball. Dass das Flugzeug explodierte, steht hier nicht:

"Stephenson sees the resulting fireball "

"Other controllers see the fireball "

Auch nur den Feuerball

"... aber warum "warnt" der secret service die Controller dann, nach dem sich annähernden Flugzeug Ausschau zu halten?"

Was hat das mit dem Thema zu tun?

"Die Beweise für einen Überflug sind im Vergleich mit den Gegenbeweisen sehr, sehr schwach."

1. Die "Gegenbeweise", vor allem die Zeugenaussagen, sind bei weitem nciht so stichhaltig, wie Hoffman vorgibt ,wie ich demonstriert habe
2. Die Beweise für eine nördliche Flugbahn sind überwältigend. Dies schließt automatisch aus, dass das Flugzeug die Lichmasten umgerissen haben und die Zerstörungsschneisen im Pentagon mit dem nordöstlichen Verlauf verursacht haben kann
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 16:45 #749

  • stefanlebkon
  • stefanlebkon's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 762
  • Thank you received: 1
  • Karma: 2
"Die haben vielleicht die Rauchwolke gesehen und ein bisschen Feuerschein, aber wenn da wirklich jemand den Überflug gesehen hätte, hätte er sich wahrscheinlich gar nicht getraut, es zu sagen"

Die Explosion hat sicherlich die meiste Aufmerksamkeit auf sich gezogen.

BREAKING NEWS

Dwain Deets endorses National Security Alert, and the flyover conclusion

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYGkiYmVUmg&feature=player_embedded

Although my involvement in the 9/11 issue has focused primarily on the problems with the "collapse" hypothesis for World Trade Center Building 7, my background as a retired NASA aeronautical engineer has often brought questions my way regarding the airplanes, including, of course, the flight that allegedly struck the Pentagon.

Examination of the official flight profile raised serious technical questions in my mind -- questions which led me to the view that it is highly unlikely such a profile could have been flown as reported. In other words, it seemed to be physically and aeronautically impossible.

My skepticism proved to be well-founded when I watched National Security Alert, the most recent video from the Citizen Investigation Team, or CIT. More importantly, I now realize that the flight profile data released by the government was a spurious smokescreen, and that the answer to the question of what really happened at the Pentagon on 9/11 comes from applying logic, with very little involvement of aeronautical principals.

To be more precise, the answer comes from eyewitness accounts collected from individuals who had clear views of where the plane flew in relation to the Citgo gas station across the highway from the Pentagon. Several of these witnesses were recorded by the Center for Military History or by the Library of Congress shortly after 9/11/01. CIT followed up on this testimony, doing investigative video interviews at the various sites where each person made their observations, or, when this couldn’t be done, by audio recording.

In a nutshell, these key eyewitnesses independently agree that the plane flew north of the Citgo gas station as it headed toward the Pentagon. It is clear from viewing their interviews that it is simply not a reasonable consideration that all of the witnesses presented are incorrect about this simple detail. The plane was most definitely on the north side of the station.

The problem with this is that the official flight path requires the plane to have flown to the south of the station. The observed damage is wholly inconsistent with an approach from the north-side. This not only includes the damage inside the building leading to the round hole in the C-ring, but also five light poles which were supposedly hit by the airplane which were also in alignment with a south-side path. Given that the plane was on the north-side of the station, these light poles simply could not have been knocked over by it.

The only possible conclusion, if logic is your guide, is that the plane did not hit the Pentagon and did not cause the damage; that the south-path downed light poles were staged; and that the internal damage was done by other means, specifically internal explosives.

I am aware of efforts by a few to censor and marginalize the work of Citizen Investigation Team. Some have stated it’s because they feel the notion of a flyover at the Pentagon would be bad for the truth movement even if true because it would be off-putting to the public at large. This is contradictory logic since the very notion that 9/11 was an inside job is off-putting to the public. I strongly feel it’s important to follow evidence wherever it leads us and stand firmly against any effort to hide or control information that exposes the 9/11 deception.

I thank CIT for bringing this story together in a clear manner, and I endorse CIT as the best source of information on this matter. Furthermore, I agree with their conclusion -- the plane flew over the Pentagon.

-Dwain Deets
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Creator of www.7problemswithbuilding7.info





DARF ER DANN ÜBERHAUPT NOCH AUF 911BLOGGER POSTEN?
Last Edit: 30 Aug 2010 16:45 by stefanlebkon.
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 17:07 #750

  • Harry_B
  • Harry_B's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 155
  • Karma: 2
stefanlebkon wrote:
2. Die Beweise für eine nördliche Flugbahn sind überwältigend. Dies schließt automatisch aus, dass das Flugzeug die Lichmasten umgerissen haben und die Zerstörungsschneisen im Pentagon mit dem nordöstlichen Verlauf verursacht haben kann
Was sagt CIT zu der Möglichkeit, dass das Flugzeug auf dem Nordpfad in das Pentagon gekracht sein könnte, ohne einen erkennbaren zusätzlichen Schaden zu verursachen?

Ich habe im Moment nicht viel Zeit zum recherchieren, aber ich bin neugierig. :)
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 17:23 #751

  • bio1
  • bio1's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 193
  • Thank you received: 5
  • Karma: -2
die Controller sahen das Passagierflugzeug nicht vom Pentagon wegfliegen.

911review.com/articles/ashley/pentacon_con.html
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 20:26 #752

  • stefanlebkon
  • stefanlebkon's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 762
  • Thank you received: 1
  • Karma: 2
"Was sagt CIT zu der Möglichkeit, dass das Flugzeug auf dem Nordpfad in das Pentagon gekracht sein könnte, ohne einen erkennbaren zusätzlichen Schaden zu verursachen?"

Bei ein anderen Flugbahn ins Pentagon hätte die kinetische Energie eine andere Richtung genommen, die Zerstörungsschneise durch das Pentagon hätte einen anderen Verlauf gehabt. Siehe die Darstellung hier:

z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showto...w=findpost&p=2279237

Interessant sind auch die Zeugenaussagen, nach der die Maschine kurz vor der Explosion wieder an Höhe gewonnen haben soll:

1. Robert Turcios

www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3RCBQKON_I


2. "...I want to make it make sense. I want to know why there's this gap in my memory, this gap that makes it seem as though the plane simply became invisible and banked up at the very last minute..."

z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showto...w=findpost&p=2293237
The administrator has disabled public write access.

Re: "The CIT Deception" by brokenstyx 30 Aug 2010 20:40 #753

  • stefanlebkon
  • stefanlebkon's Avatar
  • OFFLINE
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 762
  • Thank you received: 1
  • Karma: 2
"die Controller sahen das Passagierflugzeug nicht vom Pentagon wegfliegen"

Das KONNTEN sie auch gar nicht, selbst im Tower nicht

z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showto...w=findpost&p=1581666

Die Controller- Aussagen sind Beweise weder für noch gegen einen Überflug.
The administrator has disabled public write access.
Moderators: Red Dwarf, Sitting-Bull
Time to create page: 0.171 seconds