8 out of 8 at Citgo station

[sheeplesnshills]

I did not bump this thread. Tom told a tale and Farmer jumped up and down. Sorry, no audience at the moment. Watch NSA in the meantime.

And you said "you wish" implying that there still was some part of CITs nonsense you still believed in. I have seen NSA and have no wish to add hits to any site touting such poop.

My questions were simply enough. Please answer them. Do you still think Mr Morin is a NoC witness? How could the guys at the cemetery have judged the distance? And how could Turcious have seen the plane through a canopy and Convenience store?

 

[Childlike Empress]

And you said "you wish" implying that there still was some part of CITs nonsense you still believed in.

No, my "you wish" implied that the argument isn't over. But here and now, it is.

 

[A W Smith]

No, my "you wish" implied that the argument isn't over. But here and now, it is.

What CE is trying to say in so many words is

Morin + Paik = fatal to NOC argument, But im still a CIT groupie and hope Craig and his band come to Germany so I can get a backstage pass and run my fingers thru his lego hair.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

No, my "you wish" implied that the argument isn't over. But here and now, it is.

so why you still here?

 

[Wygram]

That's CIT - citizens investigative team. Aldo and somebody. They are nuts.

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

 

[Reheat]

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

You're really funny in a pathetic kind of way. What's your evidence that some witnesses were faked? Oh, I see, you have none.

I have never seen anyone call the two Pentagon Security Guards "nuts". Do you have a reference you can post? Thought not.......

They were simply mistaken, that's all. All of the other valid physical evidence supports that conclusion.

This is a dead horse and you're on the wrong side of the horse. Do those blows hurt?

 

[twinstead]

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

You see, this statement makes it obvious that you aren't paying attention. None of us is saying ANY witnesses are "fake". In fact, I will admit that any number of witnesses, on both side of the argument, could be mistaken. In fact, CIT is saying that all the physical evidence was planted or faked. Is that hand waving things away that would prove them wrong or what?

This is a preponderance of evidence issue. The preponderance of evidence, physical and eye witness, when taken AS A WHOLE, is what I use to determine what I believe happened at the Pentagon. Don't you? I could care less what a few eye witnesses say one way or the other. Too many studies have been done about eye witnesses.

The physical evidence trumps eye witness accounts ALWAYS unless evidence can be shown the physical evidence was faked. Do you have any of that?

 

[BCR]

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

Faked? Strange that a witness "saying something that would prove you wrong" are faked.

 

[The Big Dog]

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

Uh, no one was talking about the witnesses, sport.

We were talking about CIT.

Little reading comprehension messing up your reasoning?

 

[jaydeehess]

That's CIT - citizens investigative team. Aldo and somebody. They are nuts.

It's lovely how witnesses etc that are faked but fit your story are legit, but the police, when saying something that would prove you wrong, are nuts.
Little psychology messing up your reasoning?

WOW, a response to post #2 in this thread.
WOW, complete lack of reading comprehension. (or are the CiT now 'the police'?)

You would do well to heed the words attributed to Mark Twain that it is sometimes better to remain silent and be thought a fool rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

 

[Garb]

I did not bump this thread. Tom told a tale and Farmer jumped up and down. Sorry, no audience at the moment. Watch NSA in the meantime.

The NSA witnesses were planted.

 

[Childlike Empress]

The NSA witnesses were planted.

FTR:

I am refering to more than a dozen witnesses who were contacted by CIT after being on official record as witnesses, invited on scene and asked to clarify the statements they made in 2001. They independently and unanimously describe a flight path so different from the official one, that a plane approaching on this path couldn't cause the physical damage. They were (if they aren't acting) not aware of the implications of what they had seen, they simply told their story.

That's the problem and that's the evidence: corroborated witness testimony. If you have a better theory than "flyover" to explain the evidence, go ahead.

If you don't accept the evidence, you must explain it away. Caustic Logic says that the witnesses are in on it. Remember, most of them were on official record since 2001.

So, what's your opinion?

1) The witnesses are all mistaken in the same bizarre way.
2) They are actors payed by CIT to pose as the real on record witnesses.
3) They are part of a disinfo operation that fooled CIT.
4) They honestly and accurately describe what they have witnessed.

1)
apathoid
BCR
beachnut
DGM
funk de fino

2)
-

3)
achimspok
Caustic Logic
Garb

4)
Algebra34
Childlike Empress
mudlark

 

[funk de fino]

FTR:




1)
apathoid
BCR
beachnut
DGM
funk de fino

2)
-

3)
achimspok
Caustic Logic
Garb

4)
Algebra34
Childlike Empress
mudlark

This is a particularly stupid lie. The witness all describe different paths. Busted.

The majority say the plane hit the Pentagon though eh?

 

[BCR]

The witnesses are all mistaken in the same bizarre way.
...
BCR

Actually I do not consider them 'mistaken in the same bizarre way'. Each has a very different version of events and do not agree even with one another. That is not 'bizarre', but quite normal. Now if they told the same story in 'the same bizarre way', that would not be normal and I would have to say they were coached by someone.

 

[The Big Dog]

FTR:




1)
apathoid
BCR
beachnut
DGM
funk de fino

2)
-

3)
achimspok
Caustic Logic
Garb

4)
Algebra34
Childlike Empress
mudlark

Why do you leave out option 5???

CIT has manipulated and selectively edited the videos and has refused to release the raw videos and has managed to come up with an idiotic theory that defies basic aerodynamics and in fact is directly contradicted by their own witnesses, while at the same time managing to accuse several witness of mass murder.

16.5
Richard Gage
911 Blogger
Lots of other truthers
Almost everybody else in the whole world except for a few hard core No Planers (see "4" above).

 

[Childlike Empress]

Sophistry won't get you anywhere, Gentlemen. See bolded part in #1792. Of course you know this, we've been over it again and again. See ya.

 

[Miragememories]

CIT has manipulated and selectively edited the videos and has refused to release the raw videos and has managed to come up with an idiotic theory that defies basic aerodynamics and in fact is directly contradicted by their own witnesses, while at the same time managing to accuse several witness of mass murder.

The witnesses did not have words put into their mouths.

MM

 

[Childlike Empress]

Why do you leave out option 5???

CIT has manipulated and selectively edited the videos and has refused to release the raw videos

Because you failed to show any of this. Just empty lies and assertions. Not a valid option. As stated a thousand times.

 

[beachnut]

FTR:




1)
apathoid
BCR
beachnut
DGM
funk de fino

2)
-

3)
achimspok
Caustic Logic
Garb

4)
Algebra34
Childlike Empress
mudlark

You have no goal, no conclusion, zero evidence, and zero comprehension of what happen on 911.

Flight paths draw by witnesses are worthless since they have no clue how far away the plane was from their tangential viewpoint, the only thing they have is direction, they all point to the "official" flight path. It is hilarious your drugged up CIT friends are morons and can't figure out 911 given the answers and tons of evidence.

You got this wrong, the witnesses all support the official story. It appears you do have to be a trained investigator with aviation experience to figure this, you can't. You believe the lies of morons; good job.

You can't figure out 911 and you failed in this post labeling people, is it a language problem? Either CIT are using drugs and can't make rational claims, or they are liars selling paranoid conspiracy theories dumbed down for morons.

 

[BCR]

Sophistry won't get you anywhere, Gentlemen. See bolded part in #1792. Of course you know this, we've been over it again and again. See ya.

And as I've told you again and again, that is perfectly normal when you selectively plot ONLY eyewitnesses on one side of the flight path, ignoring those on the other side by labeling them 'government agents', 'suspicious', 'impossible', and on-and-on-and-on. If you cherry-pick your results, you end up with only those you want. And people like you come along and evade the issue when the paths they draw are mutually exclusive, meaning that for one to have happened, the others could not have happened. Keep in mind CE, CIT only interviewed the Arlington NC eyewitnesses after I found them first. They went running off with CMH interviews in hand to Arlington so they could find more NoC folks. The problem is, the flight path described by these guys would put the plane so far north that Morin or Paik would have been unable to see it (Middleton a great example).

The one thing they all agree upon is this .... they stood there and watched it slam into the Pentagon. Not over it ... into it. So we have 100% agreement among ALL of the eyewitnesses on that one.