CIT Fraud Revealed

mudlark said:
That post speaks for itself beachnut. LMAO!
Apart from the fact that it is pure nonsense and manipulation of still images to fit that warped imagnation of yours, how do you explain the PATHS they ALL drew and signed? Slip of the pen or..?
Click to expand...

Their paths are impossible to fly. Please pick one that is aerodynamically possible.

Each witness from the CIT video is pointing to the real flight path of 77. The flight path is from RADAR and FDR, with a path of downed lampposts hit by 77 on the real flight path.

Fantasy is saying FDR, RADAR, and lampposts were staged, and ignoring the direction in CIT videos their own witnesses are pointing; South.
 
16.5 said:
well folks, it has been a couple of years, and we have some new friends and some old friends back.

So now is as good a time as any to ask whether CIT ever released the raw video of their entire interview with Edward Paik.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

I don't think this will ever surface. They've thrown so many of their witnesses that 'support' their claims under the bus - Paik's full testimony would be yet another nail in their coffin.
 
Came across this article in my news feed this morning. It highlights something that we've attempted to tell the CIT crowd for years.

Whether it's a shark or a tiny spider, there are many things out there that scare us.

But we may not be in as much danger as we think as our fears can make objects seem much closer than they actually are.

For fear can skew our perception of approaching objects, causing us to underestimate the distance of a threatening one, according to researchers from Emory University in Atlanta, Georgia, and the University of London.
Click to expand...

How fear can make scary objects appear closer than they really are - Mail Online
 
You're kind of missing the point, CE; emotion can and does distort perception of events, especially remembered years after the fact. CIT has to selectively interpret even their own witnesses to support their theory.
 
BCR said:
Why thank you CE. You finally understand that SGT Lagasse who was facing his car (south), could not see a plane passing behind him (north). After all these years you finally understand.
Click to expand...

A big reason CIT witnesses failed to draw the real flight path; yet they all pointed to the "official", as in reality flight path. CIT fraud is easy to see.
 
Lol, folks, keep on repeating the ridiculous mantra, i'm afraid for you nobody's listening. btw, just in through the feeds "coincidentally":

Kevin Barrett said:
Today I'll be taking calls on this issue, as well as discussing it with former Marine officer and Pilots for 9/11 Truth member Shelton Lankford, who quit the 9/11 consensus panel because it seemed bent on obscuring the obvious fact that there IS a consensus within the truth movement that no 757 hit the Pentagon, and that CIT's research is solid; and Craig McKee, who has replaced a certain tarnished website to become THE "9/11 blogger."
Click to expand...


Starts in 100 minutes here on American Freedom Radio. Enjoy and give him a call. :D
 
Childlike Empress said:
Lol, folks, keep on repeating the ridiculous mantra, i'm afraid for you nobody's listening.
Click to expand...

True, the CiT and you keep repeating the absolutely ridiculous mantra of an unseen downing of lamp poles, an unseen influx of aircraft and body parts and the unseen centerpiece of their mantra, a flyover of the aircraft seen approcahing the Pentagon low and fast.


,,,,,,,,,, and nobody's listening, aside from the few crazy no planers who buy into such fantasies.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Lol, folks, keep on repeating the ridiculous mantra, i'm afraid for you nobody's listening.
Click to expand...
Why are you currently unwilling to engage in any substantial debate on this subject?

btw, just in through the feeds "coincidentally":




Starts in 100 minutes here on American Freedom Radio. Enjoy and give him a call. :D
Click to expand...

The funny thing is that truthers aren't sure if it was a missile or a fighter or a cargo plane or a drone. Meanwhile, in NYC, we can't pin you down to explosives, thermite, explosive thermite (:boggled:), orbital space lasers, holograms, etc. Shanksville was either a plant, or the actual remains of a real plane that was shot down. And almost no Truther is willing to explain what happened to the actual people on board the planes.

So much for consensus.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Hope you all washed your mouths in the meantime, stream is on now for two hours. First caller wasn't a debunker. :p
Click to expand...

Seriously??

You're using the fact that the first caller was not a debunker as one-upmanship?

Talk about clutching at straws :p

Did it ever occur to you that you're flogging a rancid grease stain?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Lol, folks, keep on repeating the ridiculous mantra, i'm afraid for you nobody's listening. btw, just in through the feeds "coincidentally":

Originally Posted by Kevin Barrett
Today I'll be taking calls on this issue, as well as discussing it with former Marine officer and Pilots for 9/11 Truth member Shelton Lankford, who quit the 9/11 consensus panel because it seemed bent on obscuring the obvious fact that there IS a consensus within the truth movement that no 757 hit the Pentagon, and that CIT's research is solid; and Craig McKee, who has replaced a certain tarnished website to become THE "9/11 blogger."
Click to expand...


Starts in 100 minutes here on American Freedom Radio. Enjoy and give him a call. :D
Click to expand...

CIT is fraud, and Kevin Barrett and Shelton Lankford are nuts if they think Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon. Another dumb claim made by idiots like Balsamo. CIT research is solid nonsense.

Another anti-intellectual broadcast. How do you find them? Where is their Pulitzer for breaking this news? lol
 
Childlike Empress said:
Hope you all washed your mouths in the meantime, stream is on now for two hours. First caller wasn't a debunker. :p
Click to expand...
Oooohhh, yeah, that's something I would want to interrupt my workday for :rolleyes:
Childlike Empress said:
Too funny. You know that this will be archived, right?
Click to expand...
Yeah,,,,, naaahhhhh, thanks but no thanks. If there was anything discussed that has not been discussed since "Pentacon" first came out I'll trust you to let us know all about it.
Then, perhaps, if it sounds in the least compelling, I'll take a listen.

Soooo, for instance, any actual unambiguous witnesses to the aircraft seen approaching the Pentagon low and fast having pulled up and flown over the Pentagon yet?

Any witnesses to 'agents' scurrying about downing lamp poles yet?

Any witnesses to aircraft parts, body parts, aircraft seats with bodies still strapped in, being taken INTO the Pentagon yet?

Any reasoned arguement at all for the actual known damage pattern to the Pentagon been fleshed out by CiT or PfT yet?
(you know, like explaining where all the missing 100 feet of ground floor masonry went while also explaining how the generator got moved towards the Pentagon?)

Has anyone at PfT learned physics yet?
 
Last edited:
Shelton Lankford, who quit the 9/11 consensus panel because it seemed bent on obscuring the obvious fact that there IS a consensus within the truth movement that no 757 hit the Pentagon, and that CIT's research is solid
Click to expand...

Really?? Seems to me one of the major 911 Truth luminaries doesn't feel that way. What's the opinion on the CiT over there at AE911T? David Chandler? Steven Jones?

I'm also sure that Barrett would agree that April Gallop should give back the money she was awarded for damages caused her by American Airlines, wouldn't he?

ETA: Here's one article that disputes such 'consensus'
http://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/official-911-propaganda-embraced-by-truthers-who-say-that-a-plane-hit-the-pentagon/
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom