8 out of 8 at Citgo station

DGM said:
Liar!.
Click to expand...

I wasn't called a liar? You people really are in denial huh?

Come on now. Stop avoiding showing me the truth. I'm a skeptic. I don't think you know what happened on 9/11. Show me the way.

And on a side note... will any of you be addressing post #165 any time soon in any kind of relevant manner?
 
Algebra34 said:
Yeah right. I'm sure it is. Can they give me an accounting of the plane debris yet? Or do you have an excuse for that too?
Click to expand...

Hmmm. It appears that just because YOU think that the entire inventory of plane parts collected should be personally presented to you or you get to cry foul and ignore the physical evidence. How convenient.

Well, we've found how how you've managed to rationalize away the plane parts, but now I'm curious as to what woo woo circuit breaker you use to hand wave away the DNA evidence, or for that matter the eye witnesses who actually support the "official story".
 
Algebra34 said:
I wasn't called a liar? You people really are in denial huh?

Come on now. Stop avoiding showing me the truth. I'm a skeptic. I don't think you know what happened on 9/11. Show me the way.

And on a side note... will any of you be addressing post #165 any time soon in any kind of relevant manner?
Click to expand...
I've pointed out four of your lies in this very thread. (and I wasn't even trying)

Lurkers do see that you can't counter.
 
DGM said:
Lie # 4

Show where she said "fighter".
Click to expand...

Oh brother... again?

"And it went six, five, four. And I had it in my mouth to say, three, and all of a sudden the plane turned away. In the room, it was almost a sense of relief. This must be a fighter. This must be one of our guys sent in, scrambled to patrol our capital, and to protect our president, and we sat back in our chairs and breathed for just a second," says O'Brien.

So I'm a liar huh?

I was just providing a little historical accuracy. You're welcome.

Just address what CE brought up pages ago already. Stop avoiding it debunker/s.
 
Algebra34 said:
Just address what CE brought up pages ago already. Stop avoiding it debunker/s.
Click to expand...

Wait, CE addressed the fact that CIT has deceived you on where Paik was and here he saw the plane??

I'll be damned.

Where was that, Truther?
 
Childlike Empress said:
Of course you will. Is it "unusual" that people don't take you seriously? Really?
Click to expand...

Uh, you aren't taking me seriously?

So, I'm lost, did you lie when you said you were not going to address Paik's location because you did not "feel" like it?

You just aren't going to answer the question are you?

Here it is again, just a little bigger, DON'T WANT YOU TO MISS IT!

Say, CE, where was Paik anyway when he saw the plane?

I guess by the time I get a response, I will be beaming up individual letters to the moon so you can't say you missed the question
 
Last edited:
@ ~16.5: Screaming again. No, i don't take you seriously and Paik's location was discussed in this thread at length. Chronologically, we should carry on with the witnesses directly at the CITGO, now after we discussed Paik and Morin. I have to take care of my stomach turning incontrollably before i can go on with it - maybe anybody else would like to further the discussion by introducing the three and how their testimony fits with that of Paik and Morin. We could go to the ANC witnesses after we are done with it - 2011?
 
Childlike Empress said:
@ ~16.5: Screaming again. No, i don't take you seriously and Paik's location was discussed in this thread at length. Chronologically, we should carry on with the witnesses directly at the CITGO, now after we discussed Paik and Morin. I have to take care of my stomach turning incontrollably before i can go on with it - maybe anybody else would like to further the discussion by introducing the three and how their testimony fits with that of Paik and Morin. We could go to the ANC witnesses after we are done with it - 2011?
Click to expand...


Hmm, I have reviewed that entire post, and fail to see an answer to my question, instead you appear to be relying on responses in this thread that were posted based on CIT's deception before it was exposed.

Perhaps I should restate the question, again?

Say, CE, where was Paik anyway when he saw the plane?
 
Your "deception" is based on a guy who has "retired" several times from the scene and shown himself to be not trustworthy by refusing to publish his material. He relies on our trust, which in my case he doesn't have at all. As i said, mudlark has said more than enough about "Farmer"'s little stunt in the other thread.

edit for posterity: The other thread™
 
Last edited:
Algebra34 said:
Oh brother... again?

"And it went six, five, four. And I had it in my mouth to say, three, and all of a sudden the plane turned away. In the room, it was almost a sense of relief. This must be a fighter. This must be one of our guys sent in, scrambled to patrol our capital, and to protect our president, and we sat back in our chairs and breathed for just a second," says O'Brien.

So I'm a liar huh?

I was just providing a little historical accuracy. You're welcome.

Just address what CE brought up pages ago already. Stop avoiding it debunker/s.
Click to expand...


DGM will you be issuing an apology to Algebra for calling him a liar?
 
vinniem said:
DGM will you be issuing an apology to Algebra for calling him a liar?
Click to expand...

Thanks vinniem, I appreciate it. But don't worry about it. We just want debunkers here to address what CE brought up about 600 posts ago.

They have failed so far. Miserably.
 
Algebra34 said:
Oh brother... again?

"And it went six, five, four. And I had it in my mouth to say, three, and all of a sudden the plane turned away. In the room, it was almost a sense of relief. This must be a fighter. This must be one of our guys sent in, scrambled to patrol our capital, and to protect our president, and we sat back in our chairs and breathed for just a second," says O'Brien.

So I'm a liar huh?

I was just providing a little historical accuracy. You're welcome.

Just address what CE brought up pages ago already. Stop avoiding it debunker/s.
Click to expand...
I will gladly apologize as soon as you link the article you got that quote from. I'll be waiting.
 
DGM said:
Yes, of course. as soon as he links the article he took the quote from.

Why wouldn't I admit when (and if) I'm wrong?
Click to expand...

Don't worry about it DGM. I know that being caught wrong when accusing someone of being a liar isn't really a big deal in your debunker world.

It really doesn't matter in this case. Because we are still waiting for any debunker here to address post #165 in any kind of relevant manner.

Maybe you should just back outta this one.

post #165
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom