CIT Presents Their Exhaustive Witness List - Yep, Still No Flyover Witness

[tfk]

Well he sole it from the aliens to begin with.

Actually, you have to give Steven Jones kudos for his cold fusion work. This is, in fact, his real area of expertise. His work is first rate, and his statements that Fleischman & Pons had to be wrong were correct.

However, when he drifts over into structural or mechanical engineering, it becomes painful to watch. His "the second law of thermodynamics prohibits the building from collapsing straight downward" was a four-star moment in his early presentations to adoring college crowds. Presumably empty of engineering or physics students. He seems to have dropped that revelation in his later lectures.

tom

 

[GlennB]

Didn't they identify hijacker DNA too ? I always wondered where they they got the control samples from. You know, you find some DNA on the ground you pick it up and put it in the DNA machine and it pops out a name....Hani Hanjour for instance . But where did the machine get the sample to compare the DNA on the ground to ?

Dunno if you think you're being funny, Bill. Cute, sharp, great repartee? Fooling with the guys+gals? Stuff like that? You aren't. You're coming across here as a monumental arse. An embarrassment to yourself, your family and friends. Grow up.

 

[Bobert]

When some truthers post its like they are screaming, "SEE WORLD! HERE IS MY MENTAL ILLNESS FOR ALL TO SEE!!!!"

 

[The Big Dog]

It might be a chopper I suppose. I just wanted to give a similar view to the one the flyover pilot may have had. Imagine the smoke he might have been flying through....throttling back....airbrakes maybe....runway 15 coming up fast....SQUEEEK....FULL REVERSE THRUST....you know the way it goes.

http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Pentagn_Approach.jpg Pentagon flyover

I just wanted to give a similar view to the one the flyover pilot may have had. Imagine the smoke he might have been flying through... wings falling off.... insanely impossible pull up with no wings.... the pilot dying due to pulling 30 gees out of an impossible bank into a 60 degree pull up....throttling back....airbrakes maybe....runway 15 coming up fast....SQUEEEK....FULL REVERSE THRUST.

Fixed that for you!

 

[stateofgrace]

As Bill offered up a single witness that saw the fly over yet?

 

[BCR]

I used to be very interested in the Pentagon but I grew wary of it after a time . It has something of the honeypot about it I find. Given that there is no 757 in the Pentagon though, a flyover seems to be the most lkely explanation.

Have you read Firefight by Pat Creed? If you take the time to visit Arlington and talk to the police and EMS people who were actually there, you would realize just how incorrect your statement is.

 

[Childlike Empress]

If prejudice against stupidity is a crime, then call me guilty.

Well, we all have to be aware of our own prejudices. Everyone has them. I spent a few hours last weekend looking into the investigations of CIT. Someone whose judgement i trust told me to look into it. The reason why i hadn't already looked into it was the way Craig and Aldo behaved on this very forum.

I watched "The eye of the storm", subtitled "Lloyd England and his taxi cab". My knowledge was that they had four witnesses, two of them pentagon police, for their "north side" flight path - the relevance of which i didn't get. Now, TAM, watch that video. They have thirteen very credible witnesses for the flight path.

From what i've read here, i thought they would accuse Lloyd England of being "in on it" because he insisted on the story of his cab being hit by a lightpole hit by the plane during the south-side flight path.

But that isn't the case. Lloyd England changed his story and now claims that he and his cab were at a place were the plane would have hit if CIT's north-side flight path would be correct. Despite all the photographic evidence of him and his cab.

Watch it, it's hilarious. What do you think?

 

[apathoid]

Well, we all have to be aware of our own prejudices. Everyone has them. I spent a few hours last weekend looking into the investigations of CIT. Someone whose judgement i trust told me to look into it. The reason why i hadn't already looked into it was the way Craig and Aldo behaved on this very forum.

How much do you trust that person's judgment now? About as much as your average crack addict...I should hope.


ETA: As for the rest of your post....joking right? Sarcasm is hard to pick up on a forum.

 

[Baylor]

Well, we all have to be aware of our own prejudices. Everyone has them. I spent a few hours last weekend looking into the investigations of CIT. Someone whose judgement i trust told me to look into it. The reason why i hadn't already looked into it was the way Craig and Aldo behaved on this very forum.

I watched "The eye of the storm", subtitled "Lloyd England and his taxi cab". My knowledge was that they had four witnesses, two of them pentagon police, for their "north side" flight path - the relevance of which i didn't get. Now, TAM, watch that video. They have thirteen very credible witnesses for the flight path.

From what i've read here, i thought they would accuse Lloyd England of being "in on it" because he insisted on the story of his cab being hit by a lightpole hit by the plane during the south-side flight path.

But that isn't the case. Lloyd England changed his story and now claims that he and his cab were at a place were the plane would have hit if CIT's north-side flight path would be correct. Despite all the photographic evidence of him and his cab.

Watch it, it's hilarious. What do you think?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=81551

 

[Childlike Empress]

I'm not kidding. CIT has convinced me that they have obtained excellent first-hand witness evidence for the flight path and that Lloyd England's testimony is false - and that he knows it. As we are talking about prejudices here, what if you would watch the video i've linked to before you comment?

 

[beachnut]

Well, we all have to be aware of our own prejudices. Everyone has them. I spent a few hours last weekend looking into the investigations of CIT. Someone whose judgement i trust told me to look into it. The reason why i hadn't already looked into it was the way Craig and Aldo behaved on this very forum.

I watched "The eye of the storm", subtitled "Lloyd England and his taxi cab". My knowledge was that they had four witnesses, two of them pentagon police, for their "north side" flight path - the relevance of which i didn't get. Now, TAM, watch that video. They have thirteen very credible witnesses for the flight path.

From what i've read here, i thought they would accuse Lloyd England of being "in on it" because he insisted on the story of his cab being hit by a lightpole hit by the plane during the south-side flight path.

But that isn't the case. Lloyd England changed his story and now claims that he and his cab were at a place were the plane would have hit if CIT's north-side flight path would be correct. Despite all the photographic evidence of him and his cab.

Watch it, it's hilarious. What do you think?

No they don't; the flight paths are impossible for many reasons. You have chosen idiots who make up junk to sell DVDs to other idiots. You use no evidence you take delusions made up by taking witnesses years after an event and twist their words. Each witness agrees 77 impacted the Pentagon. So you got delusions by CIT with a moronic conclusion supported with witnesses who say 77 impacted the Pentagon and knocked down the lampposts. The RADAR data, FDR, and physical evidence refutes CIT and makes they morons who make up lies.

Lloyd is playing with the dirt dumb dolts from CIT. The only thing credible about their video is it is proof CIT is mentally ill, or pathetic salesmen with moronic lies.

 

[Baylor]

Go CIT!

ETA: CE, this is one of your "13 North of Citgo^TM Eyewitnesses"

 

[dtugg]

I'm not kidding. CIT has convinced me that they have obtained excellent first-hand witness evidence for the flight path and that Lloyd England's testimony is false - and that he knows it. As we are talking about prejudices here, what if you would watch the video i've linked to before you comment?

LOL! You got conned by a couple of psychotic, moronic frauds! What does that make you?

Do you think the plane really flew over the Pentagon?

 

[Baylor]

Even without the light poles and the damage to the pentagon and the eyewitness testimonies it's already been proven the plane flew South of Citgo. Thanks to the hard work of our two NWO monkeys Caustic Logic and 911Files.

AA77 reveals herself.

 

[TJM]

I watched that quite some time ago. IIRC, CIT's witnesses confirm the NOC flight path but they all say that AAL77 went into the Pentagon. Something Craig and Aldo left out of the movie.

 

[apathoid]

I'm not kidding. CIT has convinced me that they have obtained excellent first-hand witness evidence for the flight path and that Lloyd England's testimony is false - and that he knows it. As we are talking about prejudices here, what if you would watch the video i've linked to before you comment?

Well that makes 4 of you.

 

[Childlike Empress]

In fact during the time i spent looking into CIT's research, i also listened to the debate between Adam Larson (Caustic Logic) and Craig Ranke. Boy got he owned.

 

[Baylor]

In fact during the time i spent looking into CIT's research, i also listened to the debate between Adam Larson (Caustic Logic) and Craig Ranke. Boy got he owned.

 

[Childlike Empress]

UnlovedRebel, you were a kid when 911 happened. Why should i care about that picture you've drawn back in the days? Not without talent, i admit.

 

[Audible Click]

What does his age at the time of 9/11 have to do with this discussion?