8 out of 8 at Citgo station

Childlike Empress said:
There are Craig Ranke photosh-ops by truthers? Show.
Click to expand...

What a shock, the newly minted No Planer missed the point. CE, let me help you with it:

Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.

Wonder Why?

Have I made the point so that the most oblivious can see it?
 
Childlike Empress said:
You should first present evidence. I can't see anything resembling a point there. Where are the truther phot-osho-ps?
Click to expand...

Snicker.

You do not deny then that the truthers hate your heroes?

Well that is fine, just fine.

No Planers, No Planers at the Pentagon.
They bankrupt buffet owners and make up lies.
They always somehow shear some sheep
Craig and Aldo a couple of fraudulent guys.

Got the uncut videos yet? Baa baa baaaaaaa!
 
A W Smith said:
Really?



Really?



Really?



really?




really?



Really?



Really?



Really?



really?



Really?



Really?



Really?



Really?





Really?





Really?





Really?





Really?





Really?
Click to expand...

Wow... that was like a religious experience or something.

Do you guys smell burnt hair or somethi... oh, Hi CLE!
 
16.5 said:
Because truthers HATE the farking no planers at the Pentagon.
Click to expand...


Childlike Empress said:
You should first present evidence. I can't see anything resembling a point there. Where are the truther phot-osho-ps?
Click to expand...

Here we go again Fraulein Twoofer.

From a GLOBAL moderator over at prison planet, Grand Twoofer Central


Well, looks like you've kept yourselves busy with BS haven't you? First off I never renamed any thread, but agree completely with the rename because it is 100% accurate.

This CIT garbage is far worse than no planers. So think I give a crap if the BS artists that go to forum to forum with their little swarm of loony bees don't approve? Not in the slightest. Some of you can stop calling yourselves "truthers". You are no more of a truther than any debunker refusing to acknowledge hijackers living with an FBI informant. Just like them you refuse to acknowledge evidence, in this case, that planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Guess what? Most of the world already knows it, about time you catch up don't you think? Some of us resent being lumped in with mentally ill people whose only goal in life is to get attention to make a name for themselves.

Some of us mods have watched these truth destroying mental patients who call themselves CIT go from message board to message board (usually after being banned)and turning the boards into a cesspool of insanity. Frankly we prefer to not tolerate some insane BS like no planes and this stuff is much worse. We don't like no planners who not once have explained to me how Chief Pfieffer is involved, and he has to be since he watched the plane fly into the building and called it in, and we can all see him do it on film, but no one wants to explain his involvement. Kind of hard to do since all he gained from 9/11 was a dead brother and a bad cough. So go ◊◊◊◊ yourselves no planners. {{But Jimd3100--this isn't no plane stuff this is interviews with people who were there}} Yea, and it's worse than the no plane BS. LOL! What CIT have done is prove beyond any doubt that a passenger jet flew into the pentagon. What happened to your invisible missile theory? What about the global hawk or A-3 skywarrior? Now it's a preposterous flyover? LOL! So let's go with it then. You folks falling for this BS are you ready to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon now? Since all these witnesses said so and none claim it flew over the pentagon are you actually willing to admit a passenger jet was at the pentagon on 9/11? I guess the only thing left then is to admit it crashed into it or flew over it right? So which is it? What does the evidence-witnesses-and common sense and logic say? Flyover or fly into?

If you believe it was a flyover you have no choice but to believe all the following people were "in on it" and helped murder people on 9/11. 1. Mike Walter 2. Lloyd England 3. K Wheelhouse 4. Father Mcgraw
Mike Walter was on his way to work at the USA today building which was down the street and the CIT loons have claimed the USA today reporters were there because they are "in on it". That's what they do-they destroy the truth movement and message boards with insanity. They have at one time or another claimed that the following are all "government operatives" or helped murder people on 9/11. John Farmer, Jim Hoffman, Arabesque, Mike Walter, Lloyd England, Father McGraw, Keith Wheelhouse, Russel Pickering, and the person on this very thread who calls himself DVD and is a "third wheel" member of CIT also claimed reprehenser at 9/11 blogger is an "operative" as well. That's what got you guys banned there isn't it DVD? Reprehenser, who runs the most important (IMO) 9/11 website on the internet is also "in on it" right dikhead? Not a single person on this board myself included has done more for the 9/11 truth movement than 9/11 blogger and the person who runs it and these nutjobs have the nerve to accuse him of being an "operative", and you wonder why their BS is confined to the BS section? This DVD individual who I already had banned once said this in another forum in reference to this very prisonplanet forum ..."i think im going to start some **** over there......
eta : i can't. that place is just so awful. it sucks so bad and the gatekeepers are running it."

So when he came here to "start his ****" I had him banned. Isn't that horrible of me? To kick someone to the curb who already stated this was their next target after watching their insanity play out on other boards? Isn't that terrible that I care about the truth movement being truthfull? Care to deny this DVD? "Why don't you so called truthers start spreading some truth and stamp out this BS instead of falling for it and making yourself look stupid? If there are any operatives here it is the ones who are trying to destroy the very best 9/11 sites and making outrageous accusations against the very people we need. That is CIT. Why do you think they call themselves that? Because they are attention seeking loons. CIT=just another 3 letter agency to me.
So you really want to look at some evidence? Then let's do it.
Click to expand...
And another

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4298.msg734229#msg734229

CIT is not only disinfo, it is headstong and stubborn to no end. I mean we went through huge debates until finally they were just like "you better f**king believe this ********!"

They do the same thing on every forum they go to until they get banned for abusively pushing stuff. I know it is wrong information, as far as CIT receiving checks directly from Rockefeller/Rothschild, well I have no proof of that.

What really ticks me off about their "docudramas" is that they take patriotic witnesses who out of the kindness of their heart allow totally grass roots reporters to interview them. And then instead of allowing the testimony to be the judge of what happened, they push square pegs into round holes. In other words if the testimony does not fit their limited view of things, they insinuate that the witness is compromised, has something to hide, or even worse.

I cannot tell you how much this hurts the truth movement. This basically sends a message to all those that might talk to people like all of us that they will be libeled, slandered, and discredited by the very people supposedly preaching "truth".

Very, very disruptive to the truth movement and to independent investigations.

The name CIT stands for "Citizen Investigative Team" but they do not even stand by their own investigative interviews, instead they debunk them. It is nuts.
Click to expand...
and another
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=4298.msg734532#msg734532
Quote from: lostdog2323 on July 11, 2009, 11:04:08 AM
i just cant see it. I reserve the right to say perhaps i have been mislead, but i am definitely going to look into this further.


thats great LD.. here is a witness that CIT lists as contacted and confirmed.. but they leave him out..

Quote
Probst took a sidewalk alongside Route 27, which runs near the Pentagon's western face. Traffic was at a standstill because of a road accident. Then, at about 9:35 a.m., he saw the airliner in the cloudless September sky.

American Airlines Flight 77 approached from the west, coming in low over the nearby five-story Navy Annex on a hill overlooking the Pentagon.

"He has lights off, wheels up, nose down," Probst recalled. The plane seemed to be accelerating directly toward him. He froze.

"I knew I was dead," he said later. "The only thing I thought was, 'Damn, my wife has to go to another funeral, and I'm not going to see my two boys again.'."

He dove to his right. He recalls the engine passing on one side of him, about six feet away.

The plane's right wing went through a generator trailer "like butter," Probst said. The starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blew apart.

http://www.militarycity.com/sept11/fortress1.html

there were over 100 witnesses that CIT dismisses, that corroborate the physical evidence..
and slightly more than a dozen who don't.. most of which were not in a position of having it fly directly overhead..
(and none saw it fly away)
trying to discern, from a distance, just exactly where in the sky something is, in relation to a relatively short landmark is guess work at best.. (go to an airport and observe planes taking off and landing and try to determine which group of houses it passes over.. not easy)
whenever there is conflicting eyewitness testimony, the physical evidence will always hold more weight..

and as long as your looking.. check out this paper on the flight path from the witness accounts..

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/NoC
Click to expand...
that's all from a single page on a single twoofer forum with the 26 page thread titled
Pentaconned spreads disingo (ranke CIT disinfo artists)
 
If I was a twoofer and as such extremely stupid and paranoid, I imagine that I would believe the CITiots were disinfo agents tasked with making "regular" twoofers look stupid and crazy by comparison. And actually, I find that explanation much, much more likely to be true than the NoC/flyover "theory."
 
That is what I have been saying for years....Craig Ranke, NWO operative!
 
I seem to remember something regarding a poll of CTists from way back in 2007...

77. Please name the three theories promoted by TM members that you think have been most damaging in terms of public perception of the movement. Rank them from most to least damaging.
1) No plane at Pentagon, 39%
2) No planes at WTC, 32%
3) Pod theory, 14%
Click to expand...


Source.

*Snork*

ETA: I almost forgot:

61. Which of the above videos that you've seen would you be least likely to recommend to others? Top choice: The Pentacon, 29%
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
btw, Ranke credits Caustic Logic as the only one of their critics who was willing to debate one on one. Here's their two years old discussion.

Maybe John Bursill will be the second.
Click to expand...

Paul Tassopulos said:
Conference Call with John Bursill and Craig Ranke 12/19/09

John and Craig spoke about 9/11 Truth evidence and presentation, some previous encounters with Truth Movement figures and each other, and their hopes for the future. It's about 2 and 1/2 hours at 25.5 MB. Thanks, John. Thanks, Craig.
Click to expand...

Here
 
funk de fino

Please do not change other members' names in order to harass them. Thank you.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: LibraryLady
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Childlike Empress said:
Here
Click to expand...

Uh, why are you linking to a "discussion" between two truthers? By the way, how come Craig did not let Aldo out of his cage?

2 1/2 hours long? Jesus, you truthers absolutely win the award for mutual masturbation. I mean for cripes sake, the time from the first hijacking to the collapse of the second tower was LESS THAN 2 AND A HALF HOURS! What the fark is wrong with these guys? I mean just how egocentric are these lunatics?

Great link CE! It is like a perfect storm of uselessness.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
There goes 16.5. Always the same people popping up in these threads. "Funny" Craig Ranke photoshops in 3, 2, 1,...

@BCR: You're right - first the bunk, then the debunk ;)

Here's the latest CIT presentation. Regardless of ones opinion of their argument, they do an excellent job in presenting it. First the claim, then the evidence. No spooky music. I don't know the minutiae of it, but seem to remember that "8 Citgo witnesses" is not correct. They have more like four or five directly at the station, but all in all we are talking about more than a dozen witnesses corroborating a flightpath north of the gas station. Most if not all of them were not able to see the impact.

"National Security Alert"
Click to expand...

Here's a fun little tid bit I dug up.

What an evasive crap. Why are your actions dependent on what snake oil sellers do?

Why is the forum search full of Loose Change, Alex Jones, Rob Balsamo, Eric Hufschmid, James Fetzer, Richard Gage etc. pp. and has problems to find something on Ray McGovern, the Jersey Girls, Sibel Edmonds, Daniel Hopsicker, Dave Emory, Nafeez Ahmeed, Peter Dale Scott, Paul Thompson, Sander Hicks or Bob Bowman that is not forced into discussion by me or some other "dissidents"?

I tell you why. You are a bunch of frightened cowards. Shame on you.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3044144

That's what you said in 2007. What's the difference between Craig/Aldo and Jones, Balsamo, Hufschmid, Fetzer and Gage? They all seem like sanke oil salesmen to me.
 
Last edited:
quick questions for CE.

Given that Boger was quite adamant that he actually saw the plane hit the Pentagon why did the CIT, with no evidence whatsoever, decide to state that Boger is lieing and that he had ducked down below the window?

Back to the Citgo witnesses. Turcois states that the aircraft went below his line of sight beyond the embankment and he never saw it again, just the rising fireball. How is it that he never saw the plane again if it flew over the Pentagon? did the fireball originate far enough in front of the building to allow the aircraft to ascend between it and the building or did the plane rise up through the fireball?
Neither Brooks or Lagasse saw the plane rise over the Pentagon either. How is that possible given that I am quite sure they did not suddenly decide to look down and tie their shoes after it passed by them?
IIRC all three could see the roofline of the Pentagon from where they were.
To Morin; who states clearly that he looked up as he was walking away from the Annex and saw the aircraft but when the PFT in corroboration with the CIT make an animation of this they put the plane behind Morin over the center of the Annex. Why would they so clearly misrepresent what Morin stated?
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
There goes 16.5. Always the same people popping up in these threads. "Funny" Craig Ranke photoshops in 3, 2, 1,...

@BCR: You're right - first the bunk, then the debunk ;)

Here's the latest CIT presentation. Regardless of ones opinion of their argument, they do an excellent job in presenting it. First the claim, then the evidence. No spooky music. I don't know the minutiae of it, but seem to remember that "8 Citgo witnesses" is not correct. They have more like four or five directly at the station, but all in all we are talking about more than a dozen witnesses corroborating a flightpath north of the gas station. Most if not all of them were not able to see the impact.

"National Security Alert"
Click to expand...


Thank you for posting this excellent piece of independernt investigative journalism.
 
jmh423 said:
Thank you for posting this excellent piece of independernt investigative journalism.
Click to expand...

No matter how much lipstick you put on it, jmh, it's still a sloppy pig.

It's hilarious that you think it's both excellent and journalism. I'm always amazed of how some people take such pride in being so clueless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom