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

[bobloblaw]

Bob,


Did Levi Stephens and Sean Boger change any aspect of their testimony?

No, they still say a plane hit the Pentagon.

 

[TC329]

No, they still say a plane hit the Pentagon.

Over the Navy Annex (Boger) and on the North side of the Citgo (both) as well, Bob?

I know why you're playing dumb, Bob.

 

[A W Smith]

Over the Navy Annex (Boger) and on the North side of the Citgo (both) as well, Bob?

I know why you're playing dumb, Bob.

Bob may be playing. you on the other hand...

 

[TC329]

Bob may be playing. you on the other hand...

Yeah we'll see who's "dumb" when we find out whether or not Bob is going to tell the entire truth of Stephens and Bogers accounts.

 

[Bobert]

TC,
Why do you hate the US government so much?

 

[nicepants]

TC,
Why do you hate the US government so much?

He doesn't hate it THAT much....he still lives here & pays his taxes ;-)

 

[e^n]

Yeah we'll see who's "dumb" when we find out whether or not Bob is going to tell the entire truth of Stephens and Bogers accounts.

Could you help me out by replying to my post above or here please?

 

[TC329]

Could you help me out by replying to my post above or here please?

I'm sorry, I'm not speculating on any flight path. I have learned quite well from others attempt to create an estimated general flight path based on eyewitness accounts and seen it relentlessly attacked by someone who invents every possible variable to discredit it.

Whats really important here is that someone on the "skeptic" side interviewed 2 of CIT's witnesses and was able to independently verify their accounts and explain to them the contradictions......

But he doesn't want to talk about what Sean & Levi saw.

Do you know why that is??????

 

[applecorped]

I'm sorry, I'm not speculating on any flight path. I have learned quite well from others attempt to create an estimated general flight path based on eyewitness accounts and seen it relentlessly attacked by someone who invents every possible variable to discredit it.

Whats really important here is that someone on the "skeptic" side interviewed 2 of CIT's witnesses and was able to independently verify their accounts and explain to them the contradictions......

But he doesn't want to talk about what Sean & Levi saw.

Do you know why that is??????

What was invented?

 

[e^n]

I'm sorry, I'm not speculating on any flight path. I have learned quite well from others attempt to create an estimated general flight path based on eyewitness accounts and seen it relentlessly attacked by someone who invents every possible variable to discredit it.

I explained on your forum that this is based on only 3 assumptions, this is exactly what you requested:

Let's discuss the flight path pre impact instead of jumping straight into impact/flyover. Up for that Jason?

Why don't you want to discuss it now? This is the most optimistic flight path I can create.

 

[TC329]

What was invented?

Well considering we don't have the black box from the plane that didn't crash into the Pentagon I would say everything. Did I miss something somewhere?

 

[TC329]

Why don't you want to discuss it now? This is the most optimistic flight path I can create.

I want to talk North and South, Eyewitnesses vs. Mechanical Damage Path.

I don't want to discuss bank angles and speeds and altitude and where a plane passed precisely over the Pentagon at because none of that can be determined based on eyewitness accounts. What can be determined is corroboration among witnesses vs their contradictions vs each other and the mechanical damage path.

This is what I am looking for. Everything up until they say the word "impact".

 

[jhunter1163]

Why was Stephens' picture removed from your site, Dom?

 

[TC329]

Over the Navy Annex (Boger) and on the North side of the Citgo (both) as well, Bob?

Don't forget that neither of them saw this plane hit a single light pole too, right Bob?

 

[jhunter1163]

I want to talk North and South, Eyewitnesses vs. Mechanical Damage Path.

I don't want to discuss bank angles and speeds and altitude and where a plane passed precisely over the Pentagon at because none of that can be determined based on eyewitness accounts. What can be determined is corroboration among witnesses vs their contradictions vs each other and the mechanical damage path.

This is what I am looking for. Everything up until they say the word "impact".

There's your problem, Dom. They ALL use the word "impact". Every one of them. Kinda inconvenient for your little fantasy.

 

[TC329]

Why was Stephens' picture removed from your site, Dom?

It is not my site. I am not speaking on behalf of Citizen Investigation Team.

I'm sure you can figure out how to contact Aldo & Craig yourself.

 

[TC329]

There's your problem, Dom. They ALL use the word "impact". Every one of them. Kinda inconvenient for you little fantasy.

No it's not my problem. I offered to plenty of times in debates at this very forum to concede impact (for argument sake) in order to have a real discussion of North and South, Eyewitnesses vs. Mechanical Damage Path.

No takers.

 

[TjW]

I'm sorry, I'm not speculating on any flight path. I have learned quite well from others attempt to create an estimated general flight path based on eyewitness accounts and seen it relentlessly attacked by someone who invents every possible variable to discredit it.

I see. This is like the UFO fanatics. You have no idea where it was, only an unshakable fantasy on where it wasn't.

 

[TC329]

I see. This is like the UFO fanatics. You have no idea where it was, only an unshakable fantasy on where it wasn't.

Average American citizens who were witnesses to the horrors of 9/11 are not like UFO fanatics. You're disgusting.

 

[WildCat]

Well considering we don't have the black box from the plane that didn't crash into the Pentagon I would say everything.

So you disagree with Rob Balsamo, whose entire schtick is claiming the black box shows the plane it came from didn't crash into the Pentagon?