jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
I did say,"All witnesses in position to observe it occur " which contain the subset of most of the CiT witnesses (did Paik see impact?). However, it certainly cannot be stated too many times that those witnesses who the CiT did interview, and who were in a position to render a first hand account of an impact, stated that the plane hit the building.
Turcois for eg. did not see impact. He saw a plane desend below his line of sight beyond the highway and then saw the fireball without ever seeing the aircraft appear again. Given that in order for the fireball to have 'hidden' a 'flyover' from Turcois it would have to occur several hundred feet in front of the building, Turcois correctly interprets his experience as the aircraft hittin g the building. Boger on the other hand clearly states that he saw impact, then ducked. The CiT then twist this into having Boger duck first, while the aircraft is still several hundred feet away and only 'hear' impact.
So with these two witnesses they first twist Turcois' statement and say that he was stating that the fireball hid his view of the aircraft (which he never did say, and which they asked no clarification of), and they ignore Boger's timeline and insert their own (duck prior to impact). Did they tell Boger that they were going to call him a coward? nah!
Paik clearly indicates a flight path with his arms that is consistent with the so-called 'official' flight path but draws a path over the Annex. Rather than ask for clarification the CiT ignores his first hand description in favour of the drawing solely because it satifies the CiT's own agenda.
Morin states that the plane was parallel to the Annex which the CiT interprets as travelling northward because the building is constructed of many sections when in fact a typical person would have ionterpreted it to mean in the same direction that Columbia Pike runs alongside the building. The CiT does not ask for clarification because they prefer to insert a meaning that satifies their own agenda. Morin clearly states that he could see the vertical stabilizer all the way in and that the plane hit the building.
The CiT ignores that Lagasse states he saw the lamp posts get hit when they first saw him. Only after alienating Lagasse does he slough them off and say he didn't see anything do they really like his statements.
Poor Lloyd England agreed to speak with them, showed them his busted cab. They stole his cab light and now accuse him of being an 'agent' solely because his story completely puts the CiT fallacy to rest.
It is very typical of the CiT to twist a statement to suit their own agenda, ignore points that do not agree with their agenda and brand as faked, statements that completely and utterly destroy their own fable.
The PfT go even further in calling for the summary execution of persons who support the so called OCT, after the revolution. Balsamo states he would happily put a bullet in their heads.
