Childlike Empress
Banned
beachnut, where's your comment on #165/#180?
8 out of 8 at Citgo station
- Thread starter 911kongen
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aa77 cit edward paik north of citgo
You have to do a better job in researching 911, so far you support the biggest idiots in the universe as they make up a flyover based on their own paranoid stupidity.
You missed it as usual. Just as you miss the fact CIT only produced a moronic delusion of a flyover never seen by anyone.
This lack of attention to detail is reflective in your accepting total nonsense as your view on 911. You like lies and delusions, and ignore rational conclusions, and logical presentations which prove Paik pointed to the south flight path. The shadow makes your support of CIT more moronic.
shadow knows
where is your comment on 1,000,063 ? lol, you are not doing well as you support insane claims of CIT. You can't support one path they posted? Why, got math?
Boger said 77 impacted the Pentagon; CIT has to say Boger is? Funny how they present their own debunking in each and every video, but only the supremely gullible are unable to see this fact.
Last edited:
Childlike Empress
Banned
Somehow the first version of this post was as meaningless as the current. Just more words. If i missed it, point me to it. Like #165/#180.
Here we go again.
Then where is Paik's drawing? You know, the SOC one in which he, like everyone else, had the plane end up inside the pentagon.Let's investigate this,
The blue line is the "real/official" flight path,th e yellow lines are the witness testimonies. (Lie) The yellow line close to bottom left is Edward Paik's testimony according to Craig. Notice the VDOT tower in relation to the blue and the yellow line and how the yellow line crosses the road while the blue one doesn't.
Who is deceptive?
Where is Mr. Wheelhouse's. The one in the movie you keep pimping. The drawing where he drew the "official path" to the T. Where is it?
What about Wallace? Where's his?
(Hotlinked from MikeW's website. He doesn't mind.)
What about Steve Riskus's drawing? Where's his?
Who is deceptive?
Last edited:
Is this why you can't comprehend CIT is debunked by their own witnesses in their own videos? This inability for you to find facts is indicative of your failure to see the CIT witnesses refute CIT conclusions as they point to the real flight path?
Which path did you pick as the CIT flight path? Not any of them match; why? because witnesses tangential to a the first time they were that close to a large jet going 483 KIAS can not draw a path of the jet. The all prove it; if all the tracks were the same they would mean something but no trained aircraft accident investigator would have asked after 5 years for a witness to draw a flight path they can't do due to perception problems you lack the knowledge to understand.
You can't understand this subject anyway, why not take your own advice and stop wasting your time supporting idiotic ideas made up by morons. As Paik points out the "official" flight path no matter how bad you are at comprehending where he is pointing.
You debunk yourself as you post; got some evidence yet? Can't wait for you next, "did you respond to 742" junk.
Did you understand why Paik's testimony supports the "official" flight path? No, saved you time; you are excused.
8 years and you support lies from idiots selling DVDs to the gullible and uninformed.
Childlike Empress
Banned
No. Where is Mr. Wheelhouse's flight path in that image?
Why is it left out?
More of that ample evidence. Why is ample zero in 911 truth-land?
The funny part is you have to throw out the evidence like this where Paik drew a line which kind of matches about where the shadow of flight 77 was tracking.
Paik draws the south of CITGO line, after he points many times to the south flight path explaining as he goes and Craig is talking as Paik debunks him. True comedy of what not to do when interviewing people can be found on video by CIT. The anti-research arm of p4t, the dirt dumb math club for failed pilot who love delusions and 2,223 gs of stupid.
So you just post the numbers of your past posts to waste time since you can't find your evidence? If anything you supported of CIT was true you could get a Pulitzer Prize; what is stopping you?
Ample evidence; lol as I spit coke all over my computer again thinking of all the evidence you have spewed all over the JREF sub forum as you advised another truther not to show up with his equally fantastic array of super duper zero evidence junk.
This Paik path which goes south of the Citgo has been out for years. CIT debunks themselves as they posted this photo long ago. Do you think their drug use inhibits their results and helps them make delusional claims and irrational conclusions?
Are CIT videos probable cause to have CIT committed? The videos and their insane claims may one day help them form an insanity plea if needed for some unrelated offense.
You are as bad at investigating as CIT. Posts 165 and 180 prove it. Good work
Last edited:
Childlike Empress
Banned
I don't know how you obtained that image. What is Craig doing? Why should he carry an image with Mr. Wheelhouse's flightpath with him?
I don't know how you obtained that image. What is Craig doing? Why should he carry an image with Mr. Wheelhouse's flightpath with him?
This image. Don't play stupid.
Childlike Empress
Banned
Your posted image debunks your writing. A flightpath over the Annex like drawn by Paik is NOT south of CITGO. Period.
Childlike Empress
Banned
You come out of the blue with some crap and i am supposed to know what image you are talking about? Come on. I'm not psychic. Now put that little blurb in the form of an argument (you have to put names to all the lines in that image, fe, and show me where Wheelhouse is missing), and we talk. Don't waste my time, Bub.
Childlike Empress
Banned
To clear that up: That flightpath contradicts the official data (it's north of Columbia Pike) and combined with the other testimonies, it isn't south of CITGO at all.
Last edited:
Childlike Empress
Banned
Oh noes, it's dtugg! I better look that i get out of here asap!
OK?
You are as good as CIT at this! Bravo. super (ihtw).
...
Paik clearly points to the official flight path and BCR posted the proof again, and CIT has video which reveals the real path Paik points to. But he seems to nailed where the shadow was. And this path is clearly south of the CITGO station. Get new glasses and use a straight edge before you make false statements about his south of Citgo flight path drawn by Paik.
Last edited:
Childlike Empress
Banned
I clarified my inexact statement already. You are still in denial. That road you see there on the right is roughly the "north"-"south" dividing line. The data has the plane never north (left) of the road.
Oopsie.
Oopsie.
you are moving the CITGO station? lol - no more goal posts, as you cherry-pick your new tangential approach to failure
no one wants to waste your time as you post your evidence again to support the dumbest investigators and their failed flyover...
So you ignore all the evidence to cherry pick the parts to support the insane claims of CIT.
Why do you ignore the multiple RADAR sites which confirm Paik is pointing from his office to the same place RADAR has 77? Do you understand RADAR? We use RADAR in the United States to investigate aircraft accidents; we tape all the RADAR sites and can pull up the data to investigate. Why do you ignore hard evidence for the moronic manipulation of witness statements by CIT?
South of Citgo confirmed by Paik, and if you use all of his testimony is clearly supported by RADAR and FDR information.
Need a straigh edge? You can use GE to see Paik's fliht path is south of the CITGO but his drawing is closer to the shadow than the actual flight path unless you are observing from a different locatoin.
Paik's drawing is exactly why no one would weigh Paik's drawing from a witness who is tangential to the flight path except to take down his exact location and exactly where he was looking. This gives us a single line to line up with other testimony to form the real flight path.
I can cheat the FDR and RADAR data are hard evidence; using Paik's photo BCR presented we see the same angle and direction which intersect with the real flight path; this is putting together evidence and BCR is using very good techniques which are also taught by experts from Boeing and the professors at aircraft accident investigation school.
Last edited: