The north side evidence validated to the point of redundancy

[pomeroo]

proof?

Much proof--overwhelming proof: Wreckage of AA Flight 77 found inside the Pentagon and on the lawn; remains of passengers and crew found inside the Pentagon and identified by DNA testing; phones calls from airliner.

we're not pretending. the only pretending goin on is you and the lemmings pretending the plane knocked down light poles and caused the damage to the pentagon while approaching over the navy annex on the NoC. thats all the pretending i see goin on.

To be precise, you and your fellow cretins are lying.

ohhhhhh! i thought if we mentioned anything about bushco other than 9/11 it had to go to the politics forums???

so was bushco telling the truth when they said the patriot act wouldn't be used improperly?

Yes, they certainly were telling the truth.

were they telling the truth when they said saddam had wmd's?

The intelligence they relied on agreed with the intelligence of EVERY OTHER NATION MONITORING IRAQ, as you know.

were they telling the truth when they said torture was 1 isolated incident that happened at abu ghraib?

Yes.

were they telling the truth about pat tillman?

Irrelevant. The military's original spin of Tillman's death was shown to be false by an investigation conducted by the military, as you know.

jessica lynch?

Again, Bush said nothing about Jessica Lynch, as you know. The military's original spin was corrected by the military.

about secret cia prisons in europe not existing?

Irrelevant. Bush said nothing about CIA secret prisons.

about secret prison boats not existing?

You've been exposed. It's time to quit. Again, Bush said nothing--as you know.

how about not sleeping until we had osama bin laden "dead or alive"?

Gee, does that mean you braindead liars admit Osama exists?

how about all those times?

Yup, you've got absolutely nothing.

do you need more examples of your shining leader in all of his glory lying to you because he thinks you are a ****ing idiot?

One example might be nice. I won't hold my breath.

 

[pomeroo]

"TAM' POST #3 : CIT, PFT, are jokes...

"QUAD4_72" POST #5 : Can anyone explain what this crazed lunatic is talking about?

"DRUDGEWIRE" POST#6 : There's also option three, which is to point and laugh at you. I like option three.

"JIMBENARM" POST#22 : CIT = Citizen's Investigative Team. Kinda like a retarded Scooby-Do and gang. PFT = Pilots For Truth. Kinda like a retarded CIT.

RON WEICK POST#40 : your tiny group of low-IQ liars

RON WEICK POST#44 : I ask the liars this question repeatedly

We missed your answer to the question about the Impossibly vast Conspiracy's unfathomable failure to instruct its witnesses on how to account for the light poles.

Oh, that's right: you were unable to answer.

My name is spelled W-I-E-C-K. You've been misspelling it for a long time. There must be limits to your obtuseness.

 

[pomeroo]

[CIT]Not if that evidence was planted! And it was! Because we said so![/CIT]

I absolutely love how they feel their stupendously complicated fantasy is somehow more plausible than upwards of 13 people being simply mistaken about something.

There is nothing to suggest that the thirteen cherry-picked witnesses to an impossible flight path really said anything resembling what the liars claim they said. Let's see what they'd say in the presence of a rationalist.

 

[pomeroo]

obviously and not suprisingly you didn't watch the video because Father McGraw admits to not having actually seen that happen only deducing by seeing the downed poles after the fact.......

how typical of you "researchers"......thats why i call you guys duh-bunkers.

Duh, why would your imaginary conspiracy knock down light poles without assembling bogus witnesses to claim that they saw it happen?

Normally, I would end with, "Think about it." In your case, the request would be silly.

 

[pomeroo]

Duh, why would your imaginary conspiracy knock down light poles without assembling bogus witnesses to claim that they saw it happen?

Normally, I would end with, "Think about it." In your case, the request would be silly.

Just to spell it out with alphabet blocks, you have two choices:

1) You can acknowledge what we all know, i.e., that there are witnesses to the plane hitting the poles, in which case you have established that you were lying;

2) You can argue that the Impossibly Vast Conspiracy neglected to create any witnesses for an act they fabricated for reasons that cannot possibly make any sense.

I'm not expecting a reply.

 

[TheRedWorm]

well plane debris with serial numbers that can be confirmed as being there through photographic evidence placing it at the scene at that time would be a start but again this thread has nothing to do with the pentagon.

In another thread you posted this. (My mistake for asking it there instead of here in the first place) Is it fair to say that this is your standard of evidence for every event? Or does this standard only apply to the flightpath and subsequent crash of flight 77 at the Pentagon?

 

[John Blonn]

Why is it that Truthers won't accept anything less than absurdly specific and detailed evidential standards, meanwhile they have no problem putting forward theories based on the flimsiest of evidence under the guise of 'just asking questions?'

For instance, to prove a plane at the Pentagon we need photos of plane parts with serial numbers that can be traced (by whom? who would the truthers trust?) back to Flight 77, or we need photos of plane parts and bodies at Shanksville (presumably with serial numbers), meanwhile they can argue that WTC7 was CD 'because doesn't it look like one?'

They are not required, of course, to present photos of unexploded demo charges with serial numbers that can be traced back to Cheney and W.

If we were the ones arguing for CD by Al Qaeda operatives, say, you'd have truthers crying that we have no photographic evidence of demo charges.

 

[TC329]

Dude, bad behavior does not allow or excuse other bad behavior. I thought that would be obvious to an intellectual such as yourself. And I don't cross my fingers, but I will hope very hard.

Dude, you do admit that the quotes i listed are "More high school mentality from truthers duh-bunkers."???


Whood-a-thunk?

 

[TC329]

Much proof--overwhelming proof: Wreckage of AA Flight 77 found inside the Pentagon and on the lawn; remains of passengers and crew found inside the Pentagon and identified by DNA testing; phones calls from airliner.





To be precise, you and your fellow cretins are lying.





Yes, they certainly were telling the truth.





The intelligence they relied on agreed with the intelligence of EVERY OTHER NATION MONITORING IRAQ, as you know.





Yes.




Irrelevant. The military's original spin of Tillman's death was shown to be false by an investigation conducted by the military, as you know.




Again, Bush said nothing about Jessica Lynch, as you know. The military's original spin was corrected by the military.




Irrelevant. Bush said nothing about CIA secret prisons.





You've been exposed. It's time to quit. Again, Bush said nothing--as you know.





Gee, does that mean you braindead liars admit Osama exists?





Yup, you've got absolutely nothing.





One example might be nice. I won't hold my breath.

so if i go back and change "bush" to the "bush administration" that would mean that you have to change all your answers, right?

because people weren't asking the pittsburgh steelers about torture or secret cia prisons, etc. they weren't asking jack black & jim carey. they weren't asking lou dobbs or sean hannity.....

who were they asking those questions to ron?

 

[The Big Dog]

Dude, you do admit that the quotes i listed are "More high school mentality from truthers duh-bunkers."???

Whood-a-thunk?

It is funny, JREF'ers look on CIT as incompetent clowns, but other Truthers HATE these jokers.

Who'd a Thunk?

 

[beachnut]

Dude, you do admit that the quotes i listed are "More high school mentality from truthers duh-bunkers."???


Whood-a-thunk?

Not even on topic, why are you so distracted by your false ideas?

Your witnesses saw 77 hit the Pentagon, that makes your made up ideas false.

The biggest smoking gun of your incompetence to produce a real conclusion is your inability, complete inability to present a path that is possible to fly in a 757 (or any plane, based on witnesses). Pure idiot ideas and fantasy that you can't even find a path a aircraft can fly to perform your fantasy.

No viable path, witnesses that make your ideas lies, when will you just tell the truth, you are helping to sell false paranoid ideas to people who beeves in dumb ideas and buy those DVD of stupid.

The funniest stuff you guys do, is producing witnesses who clearly saw 77 hit the Pentagon! Then you make up lies! FUNNY and sick, CIT, citizen investigation team, Pentacon, as in conning people out of money for your lies, is the dumbest investigation junk I have ever seen; there is a movie here so sick and stupid it will beat "Hitler In Springtime". Please tell me, are you a neoNAZI, or just acting like one? The only other people who make up this many wild, crazy, dumb, false ideas are those I found to be neoNAZIs. JAQ, and since you are so far off topic…

NoC has zero path! CIT has failed to make a viable story.

 

[pomeroo]

so if i go back and change "bush" to the "bush administration" that would mean that you have to change all your answers, right?

because people weren't asking the pittsburgh steelers about torture or secret cia prisons, etc. they weren't asking jack black & jim carey. they weren't asking lou dobbs or sean hannity.....

who were they asking those questions to ron?

Enough of this silly drivel. Your conspiracy doesn't exist. Bush and the military are not identical. The Bush administration is not the same as the military. I don't give a rat's patoot about CIA "secret" prisons. I wish they existed and more terrorists were in them.

Stop ducking the questions I ask.

 

[ihaunter]

The thing that boggles my mind about the CIT crew, is how can they not see that every argument they put forward to strengthen the supposed "North of Citgo" claims apply equally to the claims that the plane hit the Pentagon. And I do mean EVERY argument. Granted, it seems for them, "every argument" is really just the one, that they have multiple individuals saying the same thing. (Supposedly) But it does apply equally to them saying the plane hit the Pentagon.
This is such an amazingly obvious point, especially with so many here reminding them of it, I just don't understand how they don't see it.

 

[OldTigerCub]

I prefer the west side of the CITGO theory myself.

Oh, and ask me about the flyunder! Flyunder makes more sense because it explains why no one saw a plane fly away.

Retractable lawn. Now your thinking outside the box. Just add the time machine and we got ourselves a real solution.

Hey, y'all may be onto something there!

And I have a witness to a "fly-under" (sort of...well at least as well misrepresented and interpreted in pffft - CIT terms )!!!!111!!!

We do also have somebody to talk with us who was an eyewitness to the actual crash. He was watch from Arlington, Virginia, which is a suburb. His name is Tim Timmerman.

Mr. Timmerman, are you with us right now?

TIM TIMMERMAN, EYEWITNESS: I sure am.

FRANKEN: You are a pilot. Tell us what you saw.

TIMMERMAN: I was looking out the window; I live on the 16th floor, overlooking the Pentagon, in a corner apartment, so I have quite a panorama. And being next to National Airport, I hear jets all the time, but this jet engine was way too loud. I looked out to the southwest, and it came right down 395, right over Colombia Pike, and as is went by the Sheraton Hotel, the pilot added power to the engines. I heard it pull up a little bit more, and then I lost it behind a building.

And then it came out, and I saw it hit right in front of -- it didn't appear to crash into the building; most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground, but I saw the nose break up, I saw the wings fly forward, and then the conflagration engulfed everything in flames. It was horrible.

FRANKEN: What can you tell us about the plane itself?

TIMMERMAN: It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.

FRANKEN: You say that it was a Boeing, and you say it was a 757 or 767?

TIMMERMAN: 7-5-7.

FRANKEN: 757, which, of course...

TIMMERMAN: American Airlines.

FRANKEN: American Airlines, one of the new generation of jets.

TIMMERMAN: Right. It was so close to me it was like looking out my window and looking at a helicopter. It was just right there.

It hit the ground! It must have gone under the Pentagon!!! I have witnesses!!1!11!!!!!!

(can I start selling DVDs now?)

 

[OldTigerCub]

It is funny, JREF'ers look on CIT as incompetent clowns, but other Truthers HATE these jokers.

Who'd a Thunk?

One has to admit that JREFers have given them plenty of time to present their evidence, and they have not been thrown out for expressing their views here. On the other hand, I seem to recall they were banned at the 911blogger (and others?) forum.

Edit: correction...not really a forum at 911blogger, but banned from posting or making comments IIRC.

 

[beachnut]

so if i go back and change "bush" to the "bush administration" that would mean that you have to change all your answers, right?

because people weren't asking the pittsburgh steelers about torture or secret cia prisons, etc. they weren't asking jack black & jim carey. they weren't asking lou dobbs or sean hannity.....

who were they asking those questions to ron?

Bush is behind you guys in making up lies, you have him beat. Why are you off topic on junk not related to 9/11 events. No wonder you lack the judgment to tie information into a coherent story on 9/11. Even the high speed impact of aircraft has you bewildered.

The thread is about the lies of CIT and misinterpreting witnesses. Why is CIT so bad at this?


At least you beat Bush in making up lies. Good job. Why is it Boger saw 77 hit the Pentagon and you CIT guys make up lies about that?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

so Tc. What did Hit The Light Poles If Not A Plane? Or Where They Planted In real-time In Front Of Hundreds Of People On The Road?

Bump

 

[TC329]

other Truthers HATE these jokers.

Who'd a Thunk?

i challenge you to start naming truthers that "HATE" cit.


oh what you can't provide any real names?

who'd a thunk it?

 

[pomeroo]

i challenge you to start naming truthers that "HATE" cit.


oh what you can't provide any real names?

who'd a thunk it?

I'm not interested in learning what fleas think of lice.

I challenge you to respond to posts 84 and 85.

 

[TC329]

Edit: correction...not really a forum at 911blogger, but banned from posting or making comments IIRC.

cit was banned at 911blogger because of public allegations of gatekeeping i levied against gatekeeper reprehensor.

cit's work was supported by the readers and members of 911blogger. it was some members of the administration that are gatekeepers who banned cit because of my words.

i dont believe it was fair that craig and aldo were punished because of my words.

i am a very vocal and very opinionated individual who never hesitates to speak up. after seeing their them be punished for my actions i made a decision to remove cit from my name in order to prevent other gatekeepers from inventing reasons to suppress it. i don't want my words to harm anyone's work in this movement. that is never my goal or intention.

now anything i say can only be held against me. that is a lot more fair.

i still strongly support cit and other organizations such as pft and am very closely affiliated with both. however, i do not nor do i want to speak on either organization's behalf. that is not fair to their work. it is better if i speak of it from an independent stand point.

Edited by chillzero: 

Edited for civility