• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

CIT.....Time to call it a day

TC329 said:
There is no need for anyone on our side to demand that these witnesses drop any aspect of their story.
Click to expand...

By your own admission, both events were not possible as your witnesses described. (a) plane flying north of citgo, (b) pentagon impact.

Yet your eyewitnesses claim to have witnessed both. This either makes them wrong, or it makes you wrong, unless they are prepared to abandon one of their mutually-exclusive claims.

TC329 said:
I don't have to provide you a set of numbers to prove they are not lying.
Click to expand...

No one here is accusing these witnesses of lying, you seem to be unwilling to accept the possibility that they could have been wrong/mistaken. (as opposed to deliberately falsifying their claims)
 
Last edited:
TC329 said:
Explain to me what implications your North side impact theory has on the "mechanical damage path" and how it corroborates / conflicts with the ASCE report.

There is no need for anyone on our side to demand that these witnesses drop any aspect of their story. That is the rabid demands of Ron. I don't think Ron is calling Robert, Brooks, Paik, Stephens, Boger, O'Brien, Wheelhouse or LaGasse because I think Ron is like his idols Hannity & O'Reilly (i.e. full of hot air).
Click to expand...

MY North Side theory? Anyway, here are the implications:

Your own freaking witnesses said the plane hit the freaking Pentagon. So I guess the implication from all your research is:

THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.

And I guess there is no need for you to have them drop any aspect of their story because you just ignore it.
 
Did Mike Walter even mention the Citgo? No. I didn't think so.

TC329 said:
I wonder what bank one of your favorite witnesses Mike Walter is describing.............?????
Click to expand...

walterbankgif.gif


And it basically nose dived into the Pentagon.
 
Last edited:
PB&J said:
Let's not derail?
Click to expand...

How is introducing Shanksville into the conversation "derailing" it when I am a member of CIT and I focus exculsively on the Shanksville?

By the way, didn't Mike Walter release a video where he denounced any kind of CT that twisted his testimony to fit their warped theories?
Click to expand...

Do you want to go over all of Mike Walter's interviews and videos?

Yes, you are talking about the video where Mike describes watching the wings of the plane fold in along the body of the plane to explain the small hole. (Of course his view was completely obstructed by trees)

Is Mike accurate in his depiction of the wings folding along the body the entire plane fitting through the 16' hole or did the wings not fold in along the body and actually damaged the building?

And would you like to talk about when Mike Walter said he couldn't see the actual impact because the trees obscured his view?
 
funk de fino said:
5) You then said you could not be bothered trying to phone in.

Because the truth means everything TC?
Click to expand...

That wasn't what I agreed to. He offered to have me on to confront the BBC. Then when I accepted he changed his story. Of course I wasn't going to sit around my house trying to call in and then let him attack me and belittle me like I have nothing better to do than sit around trying to call into his TV show.

If Ron would schedule a time and give me a secure number I would call in without hesitation and confront the BBC about their editing/censoring of eyewitness statements.

Ron knows I am telling the truth in regards to Mrs. McElwain and Ms. Weyant so he isn't going to allow that to happen.
 
TC329 said:
That wasn't what I agreed to. He offered to have me on to confront the BBC. Then when I accepted he changed his story. Of course I wasn't going to sit around my house trying to call in and then let him attack me and belittle me like I have nothing better to do than sit around trying to call into his TV show.

If Ron would schedule a time and give me a secure number I would call in without hesitation and confront the BBC about their editing/censoring of eyewitness statements.

Ron knows I am telling the truth in regards to Mrs. McElwain and Ms. Weyant so he isn't going to allow that to happen.
Click to expand...

The truth is everything TC?
 
nicepants said:
No one here is accusing these witnesses of lying, you seem to be unwilling to accept the possibility that they could have been wrong/mistaken. (as opposed to deliberately falsifying their claims)
Click to expand...


I am very open to the possibility that they could be wrong/mistaken.

However due to their location I am open to them being wrong/mistaken on their conclusion as opposed to their placement of the plane.

Have you ever once even considered this a possibility or are you too close minded?
 
16.5 said:
MY North Side theory? Anyway, here are the implications:

Your own freaking witnesses said the plane hit the freaking Pentagon. So I guess the implication from all your research is:

THE PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON.

And I guess there is no need for you to have them drop any aspect of their story because you just ignore it.
Click to expand...


Let's say for the sake of argument that I, Domenick (not CIT) concede the plane impacted the building. Then I would still stick to the North side because that's where the witnesses place it.

So to me this means the plane didn't penetrate the building too far, most likely wasn't AA77 or any 757, and all the damage inside was still mostly the result of preplanted explosions with the impact being the cover for the bombs.

That's what happens when I concede that it impacted.

If (and that's a big "IF") a plane hit the Pentagon on the morning of 9/11/2001 then it did so approaching from the North side of the Citgo station as corroborated by eyewitnesses again and again and again.

And I do that without dismissing a single aspect of their testimony.

You guys on the other hand have to throw out every single thing they say still before the word "impact" to secure your little fantasy.
 
TC329 said:
How is introducing Shanksville into the conversation "derailing" it when I am a member of CIT and I focus exculsively on the Shanksville?
Click to expand...

Oh sorry, dodging I guess would be a better term?
TC329 said:
And would you like to talk about when Mike Walter said he couldn't see the actual impact because the trees obscured his view?
Click to expand...

Got a link?

This is the video I was referring to, this is from at least 2006, since he states "...over the past 5 years...":



Several times he states he watched it hit the Pentagon.
 
Last edited:
From TC -
So to me this means the plane didn't penetrate the building too far, most likely wasn't AA77 or any 757, and all the damage inside was still mostly the result of preplanted explosions with the impact being the cover for the bombs.


I won't bother asking you for proof of the above assertation because everyone here knows you have none. I hope one day you will emerge from your paranoia long enough to realize how much your precious life you have wasted.
 
TC329 said:
Why do you exclude the pivot and the bank?
Click to expand...

Dom, if you take everything he says as 100% infallible, then you also must admit:

1. It was an AA jet
2. It hit the Pentagon

Both of which destroy CIT's fantasy theory.

A W Smith said:
this pivot and bank?
Click to expand...

Ru roh rorge!!!
 
Last edited:
Yes, thanks :) original embed had the full URL :hit:
 
Last edited:
TC329 said:
Let's say for the sake of argument that I, Domenick (not CIT) concede the plane impacted the building. Then I would still stick to the North side because that's where the witnesses place it.

And I do that without dismissing a single aspect of their testimony.

You guys on the other hand have to throw out every single thing they say still before the word "impact" to secure your little fantasy.
Click to expand...

Dismiss a single aspect of their testimony?? You have dismissed EVERYTHING but three or four guys North Side Citgo claim.

What is more, did your handful of North Siders tell you that it was not an American 757? Of course not.

So they saw the plane, they said it hit the pentagon, and now what you are saying is they saw something else? Something smaller than a 757?

Are you following here, do you see how your story does not make sense?

Let us look at this line:

"So to me this means the plane didn't penetrate the building too far, most likely wasn't AA77 or any 757."

Wait, what? You are saying that you think it did not penetrate the building too far, so it wasn't a 757, because a 757 would have penetrated the building as far as it did, but what YOUR OWN WITNESSES say was the plane that crashed into the Pentagon was really not a 757?

Well, good luck with all of that! Man, what it must be like to be surfing the fringe of a fringe movement and to have the other Truthers rally around in support of your position!

^^crickets^^
 
TC329 said:
Where is the evidence that Aldo ever threatened anyone's child? I have not seen it so I don't believe it.

I know Aldo has a temper and isn't afraid to express himself but in all the years that I have known him and spoken with him I have no reason to believe what so ever that he would ever threaten anyone's child.

You on the other hand were fired for your obsession with Craig, Bob.
You on the other hand had your newly vacant position filled by Aldo, Bob.
So most likely you are a very bitter, very angry person who has registered here at these forums solely to attack Craig and Aldo.

You continue to post here and continue to attack them.

When did you get fired and why don't you tell everyone why the company fired you instead of Craig?

All the evidence points towards your own dementia Bob.
Click to expand...

What I would like to know is what exactly is Aldo's expertise is in anything related to 9-11. Other than being a know it all. He says that it was not a 767 that hit the north tower yet provides no evidence of this.

This gives a good idea what Craig and Aldo are all about. Just read Aldo's posts directed at me over at LCF. Preety much proves what is said right.

< http://arabesque911.blogspot.com/search/label/Craig Ranke >
 
Last edited:
A W Smith said:
This pivot and bank? Compare this to Edward Paiks two photos

http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/paikgoogleresize.jpg
Click to expand...


I wouldn't call it that one.

When Sean Boger describes the planes bank it places it crossing over the Navy Annex onto the North side of the Citgo station.

So who would be in the best position to witness this bank and where it occurs?

1) Edward Paik (you know his location)
2) Mike Walter (you know his location)
3) Sean Boger (the Heliport Tower at the Pentagon facing the Citgo station)


Come on A W, if you're honest you will at least acknowledge Boger is the best eyewitness to state where the bank occured and where it finished.

Or is Sean Boger watching a shadow on the North side of the Citgo too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom