UPDATE: Jeffrey Epstein's Private Jet Flight History SCRUBBED and UNTRACKABLE ... Archive anything that remains! EPSTEIN DIDN'T KILL HIMSELF and might still be flying LOLITA EXPRESS (pizzagate)

submitted ago by ORDOTEMPLIINTERNETIS

Following up on my dig into the flight records of Epstein's private jets from 9/20/2019 : Epstein's alleged plane tracked visiting ISLANDS, LITTLE ROCK, ATL, MEXICO CITY, DENVER, even ANTARCTICA- AFTER-DEATH/IMPRISONMENT!!! https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3434669

While much of the data was blocked and scrubbed on other sites even then, I was able to find the flight history from ADSB Exchange Flight Data here : https://flight-data.adsbexchange.com/map?icao=A0547F&date=2019-07-23 https://amp.insider.com/images/5d3f64f336e03c6da05795da-1536-768.png

Today I went to see if there was any more information, and the flight tracker history has been taken down altogether. ITS GONE!

10/6/2019

The historical search at flight-data.adsbexchange is currently down until further notice.

N120JE - JEGE LLC (ST THOMAS VI)

This aircraft (N120JE) is not available for public tracking per request from the owner/operator.

With the "EPSTEIN DIDNT KILL HIMSELF" meme bringing this story back in the limelight, perhaps they are attempting to control the narrative. Let's make sure they get it right. According to the flight info he could be alive and well, 30,000 ft up.

Can anyone find any data on his jets anymore? Could this mean Lolita Express is still flying?

This is an ALERT for anyone following this flight data, to review, compile and archive, what you have, because They want it gone.

Thankfully @Shewhomustbeobeyed Archived most of my last post here:

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Vindicator ago

Hmmm. I think disinfo is being pushed here, though I'm not sure who is driving it. Not saying you are, OTI.

First, the alleged "Antarctica" trip on 7/23/2019 does not look like a real flight path. Note that the reported locations are all in the Caribbean, except for one red dot in Antarctica.

Second, according to this article published shortly before the alleged 7/23/2019 flight, the flight tracker site is sourced by "enthusiasts" who track planes with their own equipment:

Most flights can be tracked in real time by anyone in the world. Epstein, however, has long taken advantage of a little-known federal policy that permits the owners of private jets to conceal their real-time movements from public view. At the same time, most aircraft are programmed to automatically broadcast their unique "tail number," speed, and current location using a system known as automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast, or ADS-B. (This system will become mandatory in 2020.)

Anyone with the appropriate (and relatively inexpensive) equipment can pick up and record ADS-B signals from aircraft passing overhead. Over the last few years, thousands of avionics hobbyists have submitted their data to the website ADSBExchange, resulting in detailed maps that show the paths of otherwise blocked aircraft, including both of Epstein's Gulfstreams. While the site provides the data for free, its owner requests donations from commercial entities that make use of it. INSIDER provided such a donation before publishing this article.

All it would take for someone to make up that flight path is to upload one false report showing him in Antarctica, which is FAR more probable than the an "enthusiast" who happens to be tracking Epstein's blocked plane manually from the ground being in Antarctica to spot his plane.

I can think of two reasons the flight data site has closed viewing of data. One, it doesn't want to be deplatformed for fueling "conspiracy theories" leading to "crazed attacks" like 8chan was, or two, it's a stunt to get people to pay for access to the site.

Either way, I think we're being played, here. I'm going to give this post, and the previous one, the "Possible Disinfo" flair both for the protection of Voat and to remind folks to thoroughly vet all material and keep their critical thinking sharpened.

Thanks for all the great digging. :-)

ORDOTEMPLIINTERNETIS ago

Copy Pasting my pm to @Vindicator for posterity and clarity. Feel free to reply here V, to provide a learning experience for all.

for the protection of Voat and to remind folks to thoroughly vet all material and keep their critical thinking sharpened.

Though I disagree the flair will achieve that, you have more experience here , and we share the same intent.

I feel the most good that can be done from voat is to 'dig' new facts , not regurgitate things that have already been confirmed elsewhere. This puts us in a hard place as we must feel safe to present related information and speculate, while also not making claims that may mislead people. Here I feel I am vetting finds with peers who are aware of the fragile nature of ALL the information we get from the screen, and that it is often weponized against us. Peers who are capable of holding to conflicting points in their heads at the same time, until more information contributes to that hypothesis.

I am not trying to peddle misinfo (as you so kindly included), SO Is there a way to fix or reword my posts to more appropriately fit the guidelines of VOAT ? How should I proceed in the future? Frankly, we are talking of children and unspeakable crimes, so I think its worth risking a bad source, misconstrued phrase or wild speculation.

I hope ALL of it is disinfo, we are wrong and the children are safe, but everything around me points otherwise. Hence why I'm fighting you a bit on this one.

Thank you for your time

ALL

ORDOTEMPLIINTERNETIS ago

Thank you @Vindicator . I'm just calling em how I see em, but I understand the stakes. I will better observe the protocol.

Do we have a checklist or vetting process for our sources - or a way to rank certainty / corroboration ?

Vindicator ago

No. We've got a best practices link in the sidebar; that's about it.

"Antarctica" happens to be one of the disinfo topics that was very heavily pushed here during the first six months of our investigation, including by notorious sites like YourNewsWire and Millennium Report. They would cite supposed Wikileaks emails (with pics), but not link to them (always a dead giveaway). When you went to look them up on Wikileaks, there was no such email. The Podesta email that did have Antarctica in it was just some vacation pictures (one of which was cropped heavily and pushed several times as being of an alien spacecraft, LOL). Weird accounts with little to no Voat history spammed that stuff here, if I recall correctly. You wouldn't know any of that history, of course. So to some extent, vetting is about experience. But it's also about using common sense and asking questions about things that sound like stuff the folks who don't want us investigating would like to see us fall for. You just look at the sources, ask questions, and click a few layers down.

ORDOTEMPLIINTERNETIS ago

Hmm... Interesting. Those certainly are topics used to brand us conspiracy theorists. Makes sense.