CIT Fraud Revealed

[BCR]

Why should YOU be told that information? Who the hell are you? Do you think "just some guy on the internet who is dubious" should automatically receive every single bit of information related to every single accident investigation ever performed? My aren't WE full of ourself?

And yet we have no right to ask for the files used to create the P4T cartoon. No right to ask for the math for their proposed tooth fairy flight path. I can't believe you guys are still wasting time on this guy. When all he had to offer was cartoons, that was enough for me. But I guess when the tooth fairy is involved a cartoon is all you get.

 

[stewieg]

Because we all know that Balsamo attracts nothing but the best when it comes to his "core members" such as Captain Dan Hanley. This douche started spewing crap about the airlines he was rewarded with this:



Nice add to your core group Bob. Perhaps he can go back to unloading 1/4 pound beef patties off food trucks!

Never heard of him, what's his story?

 

[Mr.Herbert]

Never heard of him, what's his story?

He appears to be a whistle blower....

http://www.airline-whistleblowers.org/Correspondence.html

..and a dolt from PFFT....

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html

where he states this:

"Thanks for the honor of joining the elite ranks of Pilots for 9/11 Truth!"

 

[bje]

You´ll have to link me to names, times, dates, what they actually found..
you know...specifics.
Did any of those "1000" directly say that they found wreckage from Boeing 757-200, N644AA?
What exactly did the wreckage consist of?

So, Mudlark, you don't know? Why is that?

You and CIT have had the information of where to find these people for years. I have repeatedly given it to CIT as part of their "investigation." But CIT refuses to get their statements. If you doubt that the wreckage was that of AA77, a Boeing 757, it is your obligation to demonstrate what those people recovered from inside the Pentagon.

None of has any reason to doubt that AA77 hit the Pentagon. ALL of the evidence converges on that fact. CIT claims that AA77 did not hit the Pentagon but flew over and away from it. So do you. The burden of proof to refute ALL of evidence that it did hit rests entirely on your shoulders and that of CIT.

CIT will not provide the statements of any of those who had direct contact with the wreckage despite knowing where to get it. Now it's your turn to either provide us those statements or run away like CIT did.

Thankfully, Mark Roberts made the job very easy for CIT and you Here is the link:

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary

Emergency Response, Rescue Operations, Firefighting, Secondary Explosions
​

Conspiracists are afraid to have their fantasies destroyed, so they scrupulously avoid contacting the hundreds of Pentagon 9/11 first responders and the over 8,000 people who worked on rescue, recovery, evidence collection, building stabilization, and security in the days after 9/11. These are just some of the organizations whose members worked on the scene:

Alexandria VA Fire & Rescue, American Airlines, American Red Cross, Arlington County Emergency Medical Services, Arlington County Fire Department, Arlington County Sheriff's Department, Arlington VA Police Department, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, DiLorenzo TRICARE Health Clinic staff, DeWitt Army Community Hospital staff, District of Columbia Fire & Rescue, DOD Honor Guard, Environmental Protection Agency Hazmat Teams, Fairfax County Fire & Rescue, FBI Evidence Recovery Teams, FBI Hazmat Teams, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Disaster Medical Assistance Teams, FEMA 68-Person Urban Search and Rescue Teams Maryland Task Force 1, New Mexico Task Force 1, Tennessee Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 1, Virginia Task Force 2, FEMA Emergency Response Team, Fort Myer Fire Department, Four U.S. Army Chaplains, Metropolitan Airport Authority Fire Unit, Military District of Washington Engineers Search & Rescue Team, Montgomery County Fire & Rescue, U.S. National Guard units, National Naval Medical Center CCRF, National Transportation Safety Board, Pentagon Defense Protective Service, Pentagon Helicopter Crash Response Team, Pentagon Medical Staff, Rader Army Health Clinic Staff, SACE Structural Safety Engineers and Debris Planning and Response Teams, Salvation Army Disaster Services, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, US Army Reserves of Virginia Beach Fairfax County and Montgomery County, Virginia Beach Fire Department, Virginia Department of Emergency Management, Virginia State Police​

You would have to ask yourself why CIT would not want to interview any of these key eyewitnesses, wouldn't you? But they refuse to this day. Neither can CIT provide any plausible reason why over 1,000 people (much less 8,000 people) would not contest that the wreckage was from AA77 if it wasn't after eight full years.

Since CIT refuses to provide any statements from these people of what wreckage they saw, recovered, and sorted, none of us has any reason to doubt the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon or that anyone saw anything different. Now it is your turn, mudlark.

What wreckage did those people see, walk through, recover, and sort through on the Pentagon lawn?

 

[mudlark]

You can also link people to this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2741468&postcount=1

and this:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5422000&postcount=108http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2741468&postcount=1

Heh.

Those topics deserve a separate thread. The first link is ridiculous. Mickey Bell is even mentioned there. Go do some actual research on the media quotes and second hand testimony mentioned in that post and the unfounded, juvenile conclusions reached by its author.

As I said, in another thread.

Still waiting on your debunk of that image btw.

 

[mudlark]

Maya can be used to simulate pretty much anything, including things that are physically impossible. Heck, MS Paint can be used to simulate things. This does not mean that Maya was used to simulate reality. Without having access to the raw data and files, not simple screen captures, there is no reason to believe anything in the animation reflects the actual events of that day.

Incompetence in, incompetence out.

Listen, Hokulele. Forget about it.
You dismissed the image before checking the readily available data and links to produce your OWN replication of the results and physically prove its accurateness.
That you and others simply throw insults not only at the authors of the image but at the verifiable capabilities of the program that created it without even TRYING speaks volumes.

I thought YOU at least were above playground tactics of debate.

Until you guys produce your own image, using the verifiable data, my assertion still stands.
An SOC flightpath could NOT physically cast a shadow on the Paik brothers shop.

 

[mudlark]

So sure, this thread has some value in probing those minor points. And I enjoy reading that, so folks, don't stop. I'd love to hear more about Maya. But everyone else: Never forget that, overall, the CIT thesis is bunk, has been bunk, and will forever remain unsalvageable bunk. No amount of resucitation will resurrect it; CIT fantasy advocates are animating corpses when they post.

Just remember that, new folks. Just remember that.

Nice one Hummus.
Reduced to incredulity and the "nothing to see here move along" appeal.
CIT has not presented a ´theory´. It has produced evidence that nobody here has been able to debunk other than by repeated lies and dated disinfo on witnesses.

The video interview, which this thread is about, shows that even when a totally biased anti-CIT propagandist went to cast doubt on Ed Paik´s NOC testimony, he failed. Miserably.

I see that even the original OP author is now distancing himself from the heat.

Address the previous posts.

Did the plane hit the VDOT tower as BCR infers?

 

[mudlark]

It is also helpful to remember that Eric Lawson is a part of the 'truth movement'. So in this thread, it is not JREF 'debunking' P4T/CIT, but their own.

Hahaha...wow.
Are you distancing yourself from the OP in this thread BCR?
Eric Larson made the video and did the interview.
YOU are the one that has been promoting it.
He obviously provided YOU with the screenshots before it was released.
It has blown up in both your faces and you know it.

Now you introduce the VDOT tower "strike" myth to save some face.
I noticed how quiet it has gone here in actually backing your claims.

And I personally don´t care who Eric Larson claims to represent.
And even less when they are part of a discredited disinfo campaign where so-called detractors such as yourself have taken him under your wing.

 

[Hokulele]

Listen, Hokulele. Forget about it.
You dismissed the image before checking the readily available data and links to produce your OWN replication of the results and physically prove its accurateness.
That you and others simply throw insults not only at the authors of the image but at the verifiable capabilities of the program that created it without even TRYING speaks volumes.

I thought YOU at least were above playground tactics of debate.

Until you guys produce your own image, using the verifiable data, my assertion still stands.
An SOC flightpath could NOT physically cast a shadow on the Paik brothers shop.

Your claim, your burden of proof.

 

[mudlark]

I think the point here is eminently clear. Anyway, back to watching mudlark get schooled.

This coming from the "cheerleader" in the room.

As I have said to BCR, if the "truther" you are referring to is the same one that spends every minute of his spare time pushing the Pentagon Official Narrative...you have a contradiction in terms right there. Game on.
Anybody who pushes disinfo in the full knowledge that it is..repeatedly..commands no respect of mine.

 

[mudlark]

And yet we have no right to ask for the files used to create the P4T cartoon. No right to ask for the math for their proposed tooth fairy flight path. I can't believe you guys are still wasting time on this guy. When all he had to offer was cartoons, that was enough for me. But I guess when the tooth fairy is involved a cartoon is all you get.

Pathetic.
You, like Hokulele, discarded it before even trying to debunk it.
You have the data. Hokulele claims to have the expertise.
Put those heads together and come up with SOMETHING..anything.
Though judging on your previous efforts, I think Hokulele is on her own.

Still nobody putting their 2 cents worth in on the VDOT impact huh? LOL.

 

[mudlark]

Since CIT refuses to provide any statements from these people of what wreckage they saw, recovered, and sorted, none of us has any reason to doubt the evidence that AA77 hit the Pentagon or that anyone saw anything different. Now it is your turn, mudlark.

What wreckage did those people see, walk through, recover, and sort through on the Pentagon lawn?

All 1000 saw plane parts? Specifically parts of Boeing 757-200, N644AA?
Were all of them qualified to identify plane parts? Which specific plane parts were recovered and handled by 1000 people? I didn´t know there was so MUCH debris.

I don´t mean to be antagonistic, but you DO see my point when making broad generalisations without backing them up with specifics, links to interviews, verification of what they said, first hand recorded testimony, documented photographs of debris, recovery and chain of custody of parts from said Boeing 757 N644AA, etc, etc..

Gravy posted a lot of NAMES, that´s it.


The people posting here may "have no reason" to doubt an "impact" or are afraid to fall out of line on ANY point debunked by me, but I do.
Hopefully the people reading this can see through the lies and check out each and every link that I have given.

 

[mudlark]

Your claim, your burden of proof.

Actually, it is the author of this thread´s claim that Paik had mistaken and saw a shadow on the ground at his shop, when he describes seeing a right wing in the air... twice... and independently.

P4T has proven it is impossible for Paik to see a shadow anywhere near his shop based on data and simple vector analysis through Maya, a program you claim cannot do math and which BCR claims is "hard to set up the lighting".

YOU need to prove the claim Paik really saw a shadow. So far, you havent proven anything and P4T has proven you wrong with an industry leading program used for advanced simulation.

By the way, what data did Mike Wilson use for his Solidworks presentation? NTSB data? USGS? Naval Observatory?

Here's a hint.. Mike Wilson didn't use any data whatsoever. His animation is truly a cartoon.

 

[mudlark]

Cornsnail, I´ll have to answer your post later.

 

[Hokulele]

P4T has proven it is impossible for Paik to see a shadow anywhere near his shop based on data and simple vector analysis through Maya, a program you claim cannot do math and which BCR claims is "hard to set up the lighting".

No, you are claiming that they have proven this. Provide some evidence that this claim is true. While you are at it, please provide evidence that I have said "Maya cannot do math".

 

[A W Smith]

Mudlark
I proved pages ago that in fact a shadow CAN cross Paiks shop from the decode data points. Using basic math and the same azimuth altitude data you yourself sourced a copy of at PFT. There is no refuting it. The math does not lie.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Nice one Hummus.

Oh, you liked that, didn't ya? Yeah, there's more. CIT lunacy is not my strong point, but then again it doesn't appear to be yours either. And you're an advocate... tsk tsk.

Reduced to incredulity and the "nothing to see here move along" appeal.

You didn't read Ryan's post, I take it. That wasn't incredulity, that was the logical consequence of the CIT narrative. Try to diminish it all you want, but it's built on what CIT says. That, you cannot deny.

CIT has not presented a ´theory´. It has produced evidence that nobody here has been able to debunk other than by repeated lies and dated disinfo on witnesses.

Funny how witnesses don't believe that FL77 went anywhere but into the Pentagon. Funny how none of them saw the jet fly over and fly away. Funny how all the electronic and physical data place FL77 at the Pentagon. Funny how the DNA and first responder testimony also places it there.

Lies... LOL. Keep tryin'. You are the one peddling lies. "Dated disinfo"... Laughable.

Let me tell you something: There's only one witness pool, and we use the same one that you do. The difference is that we don't subtract ones who's testimony is "inconvenient", nor do we try to twist their testimonies into things they are not. In other words: We're not the ones being dishonest about what they say. Nor are we the ones looney enough to try to pretend that their statements overturns physical and electronic evidence. And BTW, while we're here: There's nothing "dated" about pointing out that the CVR and FDR clearly put the jet in the Pentagon, as does the radar data (it goes beyond the RADES recordings, BTW... something you choose not to confront, since it's inconvenient).

CIT does not have "evidence". You have misinterpretations of witness statements, and cherry-picked ones at that. Don't try to talk to me about evidence; you're the one who tried to present an animation as evidence without supporting proof that the elements in the animation were accurately represented. So don't presume to insult the term "evidence". You clearly do not understand what the term entails.

The video interview, which this thread is about, shows that even when a totally biased anti-CIT propagandist went to cast doubt on Ed Paik´s NOC testimony, he failed. Miserably.

I see that even the original OP author is now distancing himself from the heat.

Address the previous posts.


Did the plane hit the VDOT tower as BCR infers?

1. Doesn't matter what you say about Ed Paik. None of that overturns or refutes any of the electronic or physical evidence.
2. I don't care about your minute points regarding the flightpath. No one imported tons of debris plus all the dead bodies. You can obsess over interpretations of minutiae till the cows come home, but none of it overcomes the bodies, the wreckage, the FDR/CVR and radar data, the airphone calls, or the first responders observations.

Your "evidence" is nothing more than attempts to shade and spin minute points. It's drops in an ocean of evidence illustrating what really happened. And what really happened is the narrative you seek to deny: That FL77 hit the Pentagon. Go ahead and parse witness statements to death, go ahead and post unreferenced animations with no datasets to verify accuracy. The evidence - not the incessant spins on witness statements, but the actual evidence - will always stand as proving FL77's fate.

Let me know when you're ready to confront the wreckage, first responders' observations, airphone calls, FDR and CVR data, etc. Let me know when you're ready to confront the logical results of CIT blathering that Ryan Mackey posted. If you somehow manage to experience a flash of reality, you might finally realize that you're peddling bunk, but I simply can't hold my breath. It's been years now, and your group's tune hasn't changed a bit. And neither do the answers, so don't be shocked to see many references to 2 and 3 year old posts. That's all you rate: Same old answers to the same old myths.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

This deserves a bump

A W Smith here is directly addressing one of your points. Feel like responding? Or will you do the same tap-dance that you've been doing with Hokulele and BCR?

Mudlark
I proved pages ago that in fact a shadow CAN cross Paiks shop from the decode data points. Using basic math and the same azimuth altitude data you yourself sourced a copy of at PFT. There is no refuting it. The math does not lie.

 

[bje]

All 1000 saw plane parts? Specifically parts of Boeing 757-200, N644AA?
Were all of them qualified to identify plane parts? Which specific plane parts were recovered and handled by 1000 people? I didn´t know there was so MUCH debris.

Why do you think I am asking YOU to tell US what wreckage from inside the Pentagon was seen, walked through, picked up, recovered, and sorted through? You're the one that doesn't believe AA77 crashed into the Pentagon, correct? So why are you and CIT refusing to get the statements from the people who handled the wreckage?

I don´t mean to be antagonistic, but you DO see my point when making broad generalisations without backing them up with specifics, links to interviews, verification of what they said, first hand recorded testimony, documented photographs of debris, recovery and chain of custody of parts from said Boeing 757 N644AA, etc, etc..

Which makes it even stranger that you haven't interviewed or gotten any statements from any of those people who had direct contact with the wreckage, don't you think? Why would you not want to find out what the wreckage is if you don't think it's from AA77?

Gravy posted a lot of NAMES, that´s it.

That's correct and you should be grateful that he made your job so much easier. We're all confident that you can look up phone numbers and addresses all by yourself, no? You've had eight years to do it, mudlark.

The people posting here may "have no reason" to doubt an "impact" or are afraid to fall out of line on ANY point debunked by me, but I do.

The burden of proof is to support your claims; it is not our responsibility. You know that. So far, CIT has been completely unable to tell us what wreckage was recovered from the Pentagon; why no one out of hundreds of people all around the Pentagon could not see or hear a low-flying, screamingly-fast and loud jet flying over and away from the Pentagon if it had occurred; and how it is possible for any of all those witnesses to the be part of a cover-up and never breath a word. CIT has not been able to address these necessary implications stemming from it's "theory" since day one.

Hopefully the people reading this can see through the lies and check out each and every link that I have given.

You forgot that you have still not answered my question nor provided any rational reason why you won't. You have to address these questions.

So, mudlark, why have you and CIT failed to do even the most basic investigative work? What wreckage did all those people walk through, pick up, remove from the inside of the Pentagon and sort openly, in public, on the Pentagon lawn after 9/11?

 

[BCR]

A W Smith here is directly addressing one of your points. Feel like responding? Or will you do the same tap-dance that you've been doing with Hokulele and BCR?

I prepped a nice triangle and made a nice table of values complete with equations, but then decided it was just a waste of time. You understand of course you will now have more cartoons to contend with.