Merged Twoof movement - the champions of censorship

[Miragememories]

All CIT witnesses are point to the south flight path, as is Morin. CIT censors the truth by being stupid. RADAR points to the south flight path, but that is censored by CIT.

All CIT witnesses say 77 impacted the Pentagon. That is censored by CIT.

Can't have the truth show up at delusional forums where lies and hearsay rule.

The CIT present an excellent witness-based case for a north flight path which reveals the south flightpath evidence fakery.

MM

 

[Oystein]

Oh, and folks, please talk about Mr Morin and the south/north of Citgo business elsewhere.

This here is about truthers habitually deleting and banning debunkers (and the vice versa of course is also on topic here).

bumped for MM and beachnut

 

[Miragememories]

bumped for MM and beachnut

Oh sorry Oystein.

I thought the thread was dead since you failed to prove your case.

MM

 

[dc1971]

Suppose truthes formed a party and won elections. Would you feel that your freedoms, such as freedom of speech, would be kept safe?

They have formed a party. It's called the Tea Party.

 

[Garb]

The CIT present an excellent witness-based case for a north flight path which reveals the south flightpath evidence fakery.

MM

They provide seven (maybe more as of late?) witnesses to prove their theory. They hand-wave the physical damage, plane parts, and witness testimony citing a plane crash as if all of those were faked.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary

From the lists above, 136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and
104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."

So which one has more evidence, MM?

 

[BigAl]

The CIT present an excellent witness-based case for a north flight path which reveals the south flightpath evidence fakery.

MM

Which is shown to be silly by the fact that there are hundreds of eyewitnesses to the fact that all of the airplane, all the bodies and the two black boxes were found crashed into the Pentagon and radar data consistent with that.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

This was explained over and over again, in general and to you. If you were interested in the answer, you would have found it by now - for example on CITs forum, which is for research, not discussion purposes."

No, not once has anyone explained how Mr Morin could have seen the plane fly down to the pentagon unless it was SOC. He is either lying or CIT are misrepresenting what he said. The google earth picture clearly shows the Navy Annex would block any NOC fightpath from his vision.

"The 911oz forum, btw, is still full of anti-CIT posts, so if they banned you it certainly wasn't because of the topic."

I suspect it was because I was simply pointing out with clear graphics that CIT were misrepresenting what the witnesses saw and that there were many other witnesses they simply ignored. Its not as if Mr Morin was the only fault in the CIT video.

After years and years of sock puppet armies with deaf ears and mean attitudes disrupting those places, they have every right to show you the door.

As we would have the right to show you the door but yet still you are here.....I guess that tell us who has the moral high ground here

 

[T.A.M.]

MM is a CIT believer...lol, OMG...I knew he was "out there" in terms of his 9/11 beliefs, but a CIT believer...REALLY?

TAM

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

MM is a CIT believer...lol, OMG...I knew he was "out there" in terms of his 9/11 beliefs, but a CIT believer...REALLY?

Possibly. He may also simply be in "defensive mode", where he feels the need to defend any insanity from the various 9/11 Truth Movement factions. He's been on the defense this entire thread and, much like many truthers, just doesn't know when to quit.

Anyway... Miragememories, since you seem to have willingly taken on the role of apologist for all Truth Movement forums, perhaps you can offer your best politician-like spin on the following situation:

I got banned from the PfffT forums before I made my first post.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

You received the proper response.

I'll be a little kinder than most...
The proper response, if anything would have been to move the "offending" posts of threads into their little skeptics forum. That is afterall their own policy being mostly about their conspiracy theme. Unappealing, but I'd totally be fine with it if it were just that. Restricting a member to one section of a forum... I call that irresponsible at the very best, and their TOS concerning even whackier theories though amusing, is quite disturbing.

 

[Childlike Empress]

[delete - wrong thread]

 

[Oystein]

Whoohooo I am now made a pariah on LCF - quarantined to "Skeptics"!

 

[Miragememories]

Whoohooo I am now made a pariah on LCF - quarantined to "Skeptics"!

I'm sure you were hoping to goad the moderators into banning you.

Clearly your intention was to present an anti-9/11 Truth position.

The LCF has always maintained a clear policy of confining closed-minded and confrontational members to the skeptics sub forum.

You are not in isolation. That forum often generates a great deal of discussion when the topic is well presented.

MM

 

[triforcharity]

MM,

If we did the same thing over here, that LCF does over there, you would be crying for days and days, every single day, that we censor people, and try to stifle the debate.

You know you would, as would every single truther out there.

 

[beachnut]

I'm sure you were hoping to goad the moderators into banning you.

Clearly your intention was to present an anti-9/11 Truth position.

The LCF has always maintained a clear policy of confining closed-minded and confrontational members to the skeptics sub forum.

You are not in isolation. That forum often generates a great deal of discussion when the topic is well presented.

MM

You are a CIT believer? The fly over and 11.2g Balsamo idiot math and physics?

Balsamo is the biggest fraud, he censors and keeps all rational posters in a ghetto to keep their reality away from his moronic claptrap and idiotic delusions.

When will you join reality?

 

[Oystein]

I'm sure you were hoping to goad the moderators into banning you.

Clearly your intention was to present an anti-9/11 Truth position.

The LCF has always maintained a clear policy of confining closed-minded and confrontational members to the skeptics sub forum.

You are not in isolation. That forum often generates a great deal of discussion when the topic is well presented.

MM

I couldn't make my point better than you do: It is a matter of policy at LCF that opinions contrary to a canon of orthodoxy (thanks, CE) will not be tolerated and will be purged from the main body of the forum.

I have no doubt that the skeptics sub forum generates a great deal of discussion when the topic is well presented. It definitely is the ONLY subforum there where topics CAN be well presented.
All the other sub-forums are obviously devoted to preserving lies.

 

[Miragememories]

MM,

If we did the same thing over here, that LCF does over there, you would be crying for days and days, every single day, that we censor people, and try to stifle the debate.

You know you would, as would every single truther out there.

Hardly.

I've always considered this subforum to be a Skeptics subforum.

At least at LCF they enforce a more mature level of behavior.

From all appearances, fart jokes are still popular here.

MM

 

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

At least at LCF they enforce a more mature level of behavior.

MM

They're not "mature" if they continue to ban people for having an opinion that's different from their own. Those "people" at LCF are just a bunch of punk kids.

 

[GlennB]

Hardly.

I've always considered this subforum to be a Skeptics subforum.

At least at LCF they enforce a more mature level of behavior.

From all appearances, fart jokes are still popular here.

MM

What world are you living in?

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/3645394/1/

check post #2. This is from a LCF admin.

Note - contains foul language

 

[Dave Rogers]

What world are you living in?

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/3645394/1/

check post #2. This is from a LCF admin.

Note - contains foul language

Yes, but it's unlikely that MirageMemories ever read that particular thread.

Oh, wait. Look at post #4.

Dave