Calling all Boxcutter Conspiracy Theorists

roscoe_the_first said:
I don't have any more time for generalisations. Make a specific point and I'll respond. Name calling gets the cold shoulder.
Click to expand...

There is no way that anything other than a 757-shaped-and-sized object flying at a few hundred miles per hour could have done any of the damage observed and it would have to have been in a slight left bank. There is no way to have executed a right bank to approach that point and then a left bank to present in that attitude in the space between CITGO and the Pentagon. End of the NoC approach arguments.
 
Muhahaha, the newest anti-CIT video by a TruthSim is out (they pop up one after another, but this is so absurd, maybe it is a fake fake truther). They ran out of ideas completely now - i doubt any of you want to use it. That's just incredibly stupid and desperate.

Without further comment, YougeneDebs' opus magnum "Perspective 77":

9907451897c0442ad.gif
 
Last edited:
How can you possibly tell real twoofer videos from from fake twoofer videos just based only the level of abusrdity? I mean, look at the CITiot nonsense. Their "theory" is so absurd that one might believe that nobody could possibly believe it. Yet they apparently do and have somehow convinced a few retards.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Muhahaha, the newest anti-CIT video by a TruthSim is out (they pop up one after another, but this is so absurd, maybe it is a fake fake truther). They ran out of ideas completely now - i doubt any of you want to use it. That's just incredibly stupid and desperate.

Without further comment, YougeneDebs' opus magnum "Perspective 77":

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/9907451897c0442ad.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

What exactly is/are your problem(s) with this video?
 
Roscoe, I am confused. You mentioned that you would like to receive evidence that would be sound if used in a court of law. Many people have mentioned the Maussaoui trial.

It looks as though you do not consider the evidence put forth in that trial as being sound. At least that is what seems to be the case because if you did actually go by your word about accepting evidence that would be accepted in a court of law, this thread would not be pushing freaking 30 pages!

Why do you not accept this evidence? If you do, why does it not contradict your claims?

Here is a link to the defense exhibits:
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/defense.html
 
nine pages in 9 hours. For the love of god, could someone summarize for me. I haven't the time or the energy to read what must be the biggest bukake of stupid since 2006.

TAM:)
 
Bell, you're kidding, right? It's not necessary to understand why the above video is BS, but in general it would be nice if people like you and dtugg and leftysergent and Grizzly Bear [edit: and T.A.M. ;)], who are not familiar with the evidence this controversy is about, but lazily rely on second hand sources of extremely deceptive character, solely based on trust because the conclusions fit your prejudices, would catch up or shut up.

Thanks ("National Security Alert", latest CIT presentation from July 2009, 81min, perfectly sums up CITs argument and the evidence):


Until then, Venceremos!
 
Last edited:
I've viewed (some of) the CITiot "evidence". It is complete nonsense and nobody with a properly functioning brain could possibly believe their "theory."
 
Childlike Empress said:
Bell, you're kidding, right? It's not necessary to understand why the above video is BS, but in general it would be nice if people like you and dtugg and leftysergent and Grizzly Bear [edit: and T.A.M. ;)], who are not familiar with the evidence this controversy is about, but lazily rely on second hand sources of extremely deceptive character, solely based on trust because the conclusions fit your prejudices, would catch up or shut up.

Thanks ("National Security Alert", latest CIT presentation from July 2009, 81min, perfectly sums up CITs argument and the evidence):


Until then, Venceremos!
Click to expand...
But we're serious dot connectors, here. And Craig promised us, several years ago, The Researchers' Edition with all the raw footage. Why hasn't that been provided? Connect the dots, CE! Connect the dots!
 
Foolmewunz said:
But we're serious dot connectors, here. And Craig promised us, several years ago, The Researchers' Edition with all the raw footage. Why hasn't that been provided? Connect the dots, CE! Connect the dots!
Click to expand...

exactly. I stopped even listening to them, let alone entertaining their arguments, when Russ Pickering exposed them and how they conducted their interviews when he was here a few years ago. He was astonished, and disgusted with both of the CIT crew, and he himself was not only a truther, but was with them for the first round of interviews years ago.

Even so, If they want their arguments entertained, they should simply provide ALL OF THE INTERVIEWS, not just the segments they choose.

As well, on this subforum somewhere, is a thread where we went through MANY MANY witnesses who gave testimony that either directly said they saw the plane hit the Pentagon, or indicated it STRONGLY through their testimony. Craig never was able to account for many of them, and soon gave up posting in that thread.

TAM:)
 
Childlike Empress said:
Bell, you're kidding, right? It's not necessary to understand why the above video is BS, but in general it would be nice if people like you and dtugg and leftysergent and Grizzly Bear [edit: and T.A.M. ;)], who are not familiar with the evidence this controversy is about, but lazily rely on second hand sources of extremely deceptive character, solely based on trust because the conclusions fit your prejudices, would catch up or shut up.

Thanks ("National Security Alert", latest CIT presentation from July 2009, 81min, perfectly sums up CITs argument and the evidence):


Until then, Venceremos!
Click to expand...

Since you did not directly reply to my question, I assume from this post that your problem is second hand sources? Or whatever...

Anywoo... who cares about north/south of Citgo, when DNA from the passengers and crew and the wreckage of AA77 have been recovered from the Pentagon.
 
Foolmewunz said:
But we're serious dot connectors, here. And Craig promised us, several years ago, The Researchers' Edition with all the raw footage. Why hasn't that been provided?
Click to expand...


Negative. Craig has fulfilled his promises more than any of us could have imagined. Your always vague pseudo-demands are nothing but injured pride. CIT delivered while you sat on your arse spewing vitriol.

I see NSA has 188K views on YouTube alone, and this is not a spooky music kind of video, it demands full concentration. This will not go away and is fringe only in the wishful thinking of certain TruthSims and DebunkSims.
 
CLE:

Well I anxiously await the press and attention I am sure their solid (according to you) and popular (according to you) evidence will grant them. When are they on any of the REAL media anyway?

If you honestly think that CIT and PFT are mainstream Trutherism (as narrow as the entire movement now is) then you really are delusional.

TAM:)
 
Childlike Empress said:
Negative. Craig has fulfilled his promises more than any of us could have imagined. Your always vague pseudo-demands are nothing but injured pride. CIT delivered while you sat on your arse spewing vitriol.

I see NSA has 188K views on YouTube alone, and this is not a spooky music kind of video, it demands full concentration.
Click to expand...

NSA isn't the raw interviews. Why is Craig afraid to show us those?

This will not go away and is fringe only in the wishful thinking of certain TruthSims and DebunkSims.
Click to expand...

LOL. The vast majority of people haven't even heard of those two morons. But go on wishing your retarded heroes have a shot of convincing normal people if it makes you feel better.
 
T.A.M. said:
CLE:

Well I anxiously await the press and attention I am sure their solid (according to you) and popular (according to you) evidence will grant them. When are they on any of the REAL media anyway?

If you honestly think that CIT and PFT are mainstream Trutherism (as narrow as the entire movement now is) then you really are delusional.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

The media is in on it. Therefore, they won't give CIT any attention. Duh!
 
T.A.M. said:
nine pages in 9 hours. For the love of god, could someone summarize for me. I haven't the time or the energy to read what must be the biggest bukake of stupid since 2006.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Same old same old. Roscoe asks for evidence, is presented evidence, then claims it is planted by the government and proceeds to make more outrageous claims. When asked to provide proof for these claims, he provides more outrageous claims. Nothing new.
 
Why did this thread have to continue for 14 pages? it was done on the first page
 
Childlike Empress said:
Negative. Craig has fulfilled his promises more than any of us could have imagined. Your always vague pseudo-demands are nothing but injured pride. CIT delivered while you sat on your arse spewing vitriol.

I see NSA has 188K views on YouTube alone, and this is not a spooky music kind of video, it demands full concentration. This will not go away and is fringe only in the wishful thinking of certain TruthSims and DebunkSims.
Click to expand...

Our request that Shakey Craig live up to his promises, constitutes a "vague pseudo-demands"?

By the way, what the **** is a pseudo-demand anyway?

Anyhow, when will The Buffet Slayer and Craig release the raw video like they promised?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom