• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Challenge to CIT

thanks Reheat

watched it.
So Rob wants to ignore the idea that what Morin is describing it a path parallel to the Annex.
The aircraft was essentially right over the top of me and the outer portion of the FOB Everything was shaking and vibrating, including the ground. I estimate that the aircraft was no more than 100 feet above me (30 to 50 feet above the FOB) in a slight nose down attitude. The plane had a silver body with red and blue stripes down the fuselage. I believed at the time that it belonged to American Airlines, but I couldn’t be sure. It looked like a 737 and I so reported to authorities.

Within seconds the plane cleared the 8th Wing of BMDO and was heading directly towards the Pentagon.
Click to expand...

If it was directly above him and the outer walls of the Annex wings and he saw it go past the 8th wing, then it did not do what Rob depicts in his 'north' path in the video.
 
Last edited:
nicepants said:
Banned already!? Is that a record?
Guess you should have known better than to use a word like "implode", I believe the only accepted terminology over there is "pull".
Click to expand...

No record (unless getting banned and not breaking any rules counts).

What an intellectual waste land that forum is. Within an hour I was called a liar by 4 posters (2 admins) and when I tried to defend myself they banned me. Aparently they don't like it when you show them where they're wrong.

Oh well.:)
 
DGM said:
No record (unless getting banned and not breaking any rules counts).

What an intellectual waste land that forum is. Within an hour I was called a liar by 4 posters (2 admins) and when I tried to defend myself they banned me. Aparently they don't like it when you show them where they're wrong.

Oh well.:)
Click to expand...

What barrel did they find to scrape those admins off the bottom of anyway?

Anyway, there is no question but that CIT are incompetent. They post a completely debunked witness, repeat the same misrepresentation about the witness’ position, cherry pick what they want, and call him a liar about the rest.

It would be hilarious but they appear to have convinced some Twoofers over there they are peddling something other than incompetent lies. And the admins over there squash even mild dissension. Which is odd, because the old LC board kicked CIT off when those morons hijacked it.

Anyway, CIT, any old time you want to give us the calculations on the flight path would be fine by us. Just kidding, we know you have not the first clue how to do it, and if you did your fantasy would be over.
 
16.5 said:
What barrel did they find to scrape those admins off the bottom of anyway?

Anyway, there is no question but that CIT are incompetent. They post a completely debunked witness, repeat the same misrepresentation about the witness’ position, cherry pick what they want, and call him a liar about the rest.

It would be hilarious but they appear to have convinced some Twoofers over there they are peddling something other than incompetent lies. And the admins over there squash even mild dissension. Which is odd, because the old LC board kicked CIT off when those morons hijacked it.

Anyway, CIT, any old time you want to give us the calculations on the flight path would be fine by us. Just kidding, we know you have not the first clue how to do it, and if you did your fantasy would be over.
Click to expand...
LCF needs CIT. They generate a majority of the posts. Without them the place would be a ghost town.

It's funny that they have actually created their own little "police state" there. They definitely have a zero tolerance policy (unpublished no less) for dissension in the ranks.
 
DGM said:
LCF needs CIT. They generate a majority of the posts. Without them the place would be a ghost town.

It's funny that they have actually created their own little "police state" there. They definitely have a zero tolerance policy (unpublished no less) for dissension in the ranks.
Click to expand...
The censorNAZI JFK. Did he suspend himself. What an ill-mannered ignorant mod.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
The censorNAZI JFK. Did he suspend himself. What an ill-mannered ignorant mod.
Click to expand...
LCF was a bizarre experience. My first post ever on LCF (no I never signed or posted on the old forums) I referred to myself as a "newbie". I was instantly called a liar because I post here (Craig or Dom called me out). When I said I am a member here but did not feel that had any bearing on my argument it all went down from there.

Yes that JFK guy (?) is one odd duck.
 
Last edited:
The stupidification intensifies at LCF... (my comments in italics)

What supposed NoC turn would have to be accomplished? There is no requirement that the decoy aircraft needs to fly exactly over the alleged Pentagon wall impact point. In fact it would be sensible for the 9-11 perps to fly the decoy aircraft a hundred or so feet north of the Hollywood special effects explosion to eliminate the dilemma of a mistimed explosion and possible decoy aircraft damage or destruction. (wasn't the whole reason for the explosion to HIDE the plane?) The wingspan of a 737 is 112 ft 7 in and Morin did NOT say the right wing was out over the parking lot. Therefore the fuselage was 56 feet or more in from the edge of the FOB. Morin was a former Marine aviator and thus eminently qualified to judge aircraft characteristics and speeds and engine operating sounds. (except when he says it hit the Pentagon). Parts of his testimony may have been colored by media reports and FBI arm twisting efforts. His flight path ties in neatly with the witnessed flight path of Edward Paik (which indicates that it went south of the Citgo) and the decoy aircraft pilot/remote pilot would have been applying whatever proper banking angle necessary to get him to his required destination near the simulated impact point at the Pentagon.
Click to expand...
 
SPreston, the expert doltaviator, seem to support this not over the impact path of who knows what non-path origin.
possiblepath.jpg

He only needs to do 80 degrees of bank over Paik to the Citgo Station (roll in and roll out not calcualted). Not possible because this 80 degrees of bank was not seen, and the wings were not bent up over the plane 20 to 30 feet in 5.7 Gs. The pilots would pass out since they did not have G training. Or is that why they missed the impact point the passed out?

Do not tell CIT, no matter what they do, Paik and Morin seeing the plane over the Road, and Morin parallel to the Annex, makes NoC impossible.

But wait, if you look close they have abandon the NoC for OC. The official bat story is now over the Citgo. The official non-bat story, that is.
 
Last edited:
Check out this gem from look-up over at LCF:

hah... debating CIT's conclusions is not the only thing we are doing here. We are debating the official story's validity. We have all proven it false. So what if CIT has at one point contended that the flyover plane went directly over the impact point. The truth is it wouldn't HAVE TO.
and you know this.
Click to expand...

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/208529/4
 
Last edited:
It's time to take inventory of the CIT claims that have been abandoned:

1) High Speed - A high speed has been advocated/argued for months on end in order for the deception to work. ABANDONED!

2) Flight Path - "We have no flight paths, just potential ones". Whether CIT has no flight paths doesn't really matter, your witnesses specified a flight path. It's pretty precise now, certainly precise enough. CIT has MODIFIED their potential flight paths NUMEROUS TIMES and they are still not in compliance with their witnesses statements! Witnesses testimony ABANDONED!

3) The flyover aircraft pulled up at the highway sign on Washington Blvd and flew over the impact point to deceive onlookers! ABANDONED

SPreston, you're wasting your time now as an aircraft that flew where Morin said it did and then NoC CAN NOT EVEN FLY OVER THE PENTAGON let alone a few hundred feet north of the impact point (with it's wings still attached).

Have I missed anything?

 
Last edited:
Craig Ranke @ LCF said:
It's the validity of the EVIDENCE we present that matters. Nothing PBnJ or any of these pseudoskeptics have to say refutes the evidence. They are really asserting nothing but arguments from personal incredulity to dismiss the evidence.
Click to expand...

Hey buddy boy, my argument was not based upon personal incredulity, it was based on rock solid MATH and AERODYNAMICS! Where's yours?

 
Shoot! I forgot all about the debate challenge I issued them over at their forums.

Very rude of me to keep them waiting. Let's see how they responded.
 
I was unaware that properly applied math and aerodynamic formulae were considered arguements of "personal incredulity".

I do however, find it personally incredulous that anyone could see the math displayed to them and claim to understand the math and principles employed (JDX) and still contend that a NoC flightpath that also takes into account the witness statements (wings level, high speed, approx 100 feet agl, hit the Pentagon), could be accomplished. What do they use to counter the application of math and science that illustrates that a NoC path is not possible? The minority reports of a handful of witnesses who specify a NoC path. They ignore the fact that no one at all reports a flyover, no one at all reports a fly near but north of the accepted impact point, nor does anyone report that they had expected the plane to hit an upper floor, and they ignore the fact that the only statements about what the plane did when it reached the Pentagon refer to it as having impacted the building. To add to this they invoke , basically, magic and state that there were no lifeforms on the craft and that it was some style of unmanned extreme machine that is presently top secret.

The ignorance is mind boggling.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't look like they're interested in a one-on-one. Strangely, however, they seem to be more tolerant of dissenters on their forum than LCF is.

'Course maybe that's just because I'm trying to be as courteous as I possibly can.
 
look-up is rivaling SPreston for King Dumb-butt over there.

I love this:

Aldo @ LCF said:
You have to realize, we can theorize and move flight paths all we want while continuing our investigation. Everything up until this point has been preliminary and we have been working with PFT for the final versions.
Click to expand...

i.e. "We don't flat out state things so we can try to change our story later when we feel comforted by clinging to Balsamo's 'credibility'."

The sound of their death-rattle is overpowering. I wonder what they are going to do when Balsamo never comes back with any calculations.. it's been almost a month for him to refute RMacky's 4-hour project.
 
PB&J said:
look-up is rivaling SPreston for King Dumb-butt over there.
Click to expand...

Lets just say it is about a five way tie over there. On the other hand, SPreston did just throw one of their "star" winesses under the bus. Again. SP sez:

"Do you believe that Pentagon air traffic controller Sean Boger was lying or mistaken about the aircraft which flew directly at him from over the Navy Annex and banked to the right? Whether or not he thought it impacted the Pentagon wall is immaterial because this aircraft could not possibly have been the official Flight 77 aircraft."

I guess he wouldn't have noticed if CIT's fantasy plane was just a few hundred feet off line from where the explosion took place? Huh, SP? Or did the FBI get to him too?

And all because they can't come up with a single flight path that remotely makes sense.

I do know that CIT and their moron minions have thrown each and every one of their witnesses under the bus for one reason or another (mostly because they all say the plane hit the Pentagon). Yet they think they are presenting something that is compelling?

It is laughable.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom