It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Ligon
Originally posted by Reheat
NO ONE said or illustrated a significant bank at all.
I'm not even going to give you the benefit of the doubt on this one and ask if you are misinformed. You are lying and you know it.
Originally posted by Ligon
Originally posted by Reheat
Dihle doesn't even remember saying what you indicate he said.
What Craig indicates he said?
Here is an mp3 of Erik Dihle actually saying it to the Center for Military History (right click and "Save As")
www.thepentacon.com...
Are you misinformed or are you trying to misinform others?
Originally posted by Reheat
Be careful with your wild accusations. The bank required to fly where the ANC people said the aircraft flew would require over 60 degrees of bank. In some cases over 80. That's significant. What they illustrate is is a normal bank of 25 to 30 degrees.
You are obviously ignorant and don't know what you're talking about, so I'll reluctantly forgive you for calling me a liar this time.
The bank required to fly where the ANC people said the aircraft flew would require over 60 degrees of bank. In some cases over 80.
Originally posted by Reheat
Originally posted by Ligon
Originally posted by Reheat
Dihle doesn't even remember saying what you indicate he said.
What Craig indicates he said?
Here is an mp3 of Erik Dihle actually saying it to the Center for Military History (right click and "Save As")
www.thepentacon.com...
Are you misinformed or are you trying to misinform others?
Here you go again. How 'bout the more recent phone call? Are you simply misinformed or are you just ignorant again? Don't bother answering as I don't pay attention to people who obviously don't have a clue, yet accuse me of lying.
sig·nif·i·cant (sĭg-nĭf'ĭ-kənt) adj. Fairly large in amount or quantity
The banks described by the witnesses and shown above are most certainly that.
If your arbitrary guesses of 25-30 degrees are accurate that is not shallow let alone "very shallow". You're contradicting yourself.
More importantly, even a bank of 25-30 degrees is:
sig·nif·i·cant ....
Originally posted by Leo Strauss
Craig- You have the North of Citgo flight path verified with hard evidence. However with only one solid witness to the flyover that case is weak. I commend CIT's hard work to this point and hope you get a break in understanding what happened. I agree with BigSarge that you should tone your rhetoric down until you have the evidence that proves a flyover beyond reasonable doubt. I believe it hurts your argument to claim otherwise.
Originally posted by GenRadek
So why does the plane end up slamming into the Pentagon as confirmed by a majority of Craig's eyewitnesses?
Most, like BigSarge, had their views obstructed of the alleged impact but had a perfect view of the plane as it passed by them north of the gas station.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
CIT relies entirely on hand-picked 'eyewitnesses', and only provides interviews of those who agree with the NoC 'theory'.
Originally posted by Ligon
Only according to your bogus interpretation of Edward Paik's statements which have already been addressed earlier in this thread and a million times before that. You have the plane coming parallel to Columbia Pike when Paik clearly illustrates it flying at a more northerly heading, consistent with the other witnesses who saw the plane over the Navy Annex.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Shame on you, Craig!
You are deliberately misrepresenting BigSarge!
In fact, your own photos, from the POV of the Cemetery, clearly show that the pentagon IS visible through the trees....the treeline is not so dense that it obstructs COMPLETELY...there are gaps between trees, as is normal. It is a line, not a forest.
Furthermore, BigSarge, and others, were in perfect position from that vantage to have seen any alleged "fly-over" or "fly-past" airplane. Yes?
I am going to stop responding to you because you have proven yourself ignorant when it comes to this info that you have admitted to not even viewing.
You are endlessly blathering on with ridiculous rants...
...and straight up accusatory lies.
Originally posted by Leo Strauss
BigSarge to answer your question about the passengers. If the criminals that committed 9/11 were willing to kill people in the thousands why do you think they would hesitate to kill a plane load of people?