• 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

Cobalt said:
A lot of that pointed out over here.
Click to expand...

Having matured (slightly :D) since then, I feel kinda embarrassed about the language I used in that post. When I have some extra spare time, I think I'll make a formalized rewrite.

Still, it's a good resource, and I'm glad it was helpful.
 
TC329 said:
Again you are a proven liar as Aldo did not say that and now I know what your name is at LCF. Thanks.
Click to expand...

YOU GOT HIM NOW TC!!!!!
WHAT NEXT?
ARE YOU GOING TO ASK HIM TO MEET YOU AT THE BIKE RACK AT 3PM?
 
TC329 said:
Please show proof that Morin said that the plane was on the South side of the Citgo station or admit you are inventing a lie to support the Bush Administrations fairy tale.
Click to expand...

Why are you so defensive Dom?
Usually people act like you when they know that they have no cause and they have had their asses handed to them OR
The meds need adjusting.
Take your pick.
 
1337m4n said:
Having matured (slightly :D) since then, I feel kinda embarrassed about the language I used in that post. When I have some extra spare time, I think I'll make a formalized rewrite.

Still, it's a good resource, and I'm glad it was helpful.
Click to expand...

Hey, I never matured. =D

And I couldn't have linked it if pomeroo hadn't brought it back from the dead.
 
16.5 said:
"Wow you just admit Morin in not in a position to see the Citgo A W and yet you claim to have attributed him seeing it on the South side of the gas station that you admit he cannot see. Impressive researching A W."

It is this kind of specatular failure of logic that makes the CIT the laughing stock of the Twoof movement!

A. morin describes a path parrallel to the South side of the annex.

B. The south side of the annex is entirely south of the Citgo

C. Any path parrallel with the outside of the annex and visible to Morin must be South of the Citgo.

therefore: the path was South of citgo.

C'mon TC, your boy Aldo of the CIT just threw your whole "flyover" theory under the bus, shouldn't you and the boys be busy picking up the scraps of your lives?
Click to expand...

.....

Michael Dobbs: "I was looking out the window and saw it come right over the Navy annex at a slow angle."
Click to expand...
On the surface, the security issue sounds prudent. The MDA sits atop a hill overlooking the Pentagon in a facility historically known as the Navy Annex. My office overlooked the side of the Pentagon that was struck by the airliner flown by the Sept. 11 terrorists. That jet flew over the Navy Annex before crashing into the Pentagon. While moving the MDA outside the Washington metro area may make sense, widely dispersing its employees does not.
http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive05/S...pEd_070505.html
Click to expand...
The Navy Annex Building on Columbia Pike in Arlington, Va., was the last sight some of the passengers on American Airlines Flight 77 saw before it sliced into the Pentagon on 11 September. With its landing gear down, the Boeing 757 flew so low that it shook the Annex and rattled windows. The Marines inside the Annex thought a freight train had passed overhead...It will never again be "business as usual" for Marines since Flight 77 flew over the Navy Annex Building on 11 September.
Click to expand...
Although we did not know it at the time, a hijacked plane was heading directly for our office. Unable to bleed altitude, the terrorists-turned-pilots circled left and made their approach from a different direction, over the Navy Annex and toward the Navy Operations Center. Unknowingly, all of us in the VCNO's office had dodged a bullet; because of Doug Crowder's intervention, I would be dodging two.

http://www.military.com/NewContent/0,13190,NI_One,00.html
Click to expand...
I departed my desk at the Navy Annex three months prior to the September attack. In fact, United Airlines flight 77 roared over my former office at less than 100 feet before burrowing itself in the Pentagon.

http://www.usna.com/News_Pubs/Publications...eptMourning.htm
Click to expand...
Scott Perry of Spotsylvania County heard a plane's engines rumbling above the Navy Annex building where he works, so he looked out his window, which faces the Pentagon.

http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/200...0193/index_html
Click to expand...

yeah over the Navy Annex to the NoC.

When does the plane fly over the Navy Annex in the official story?
 
TC, Since you're a super duper investigator and interested in the truth, why don't you also quote the VDOT employees that indicated AA77 passed over their building?

No cope out now. You're either interested in the truth or you're not. Which is it?
 
TC329 said:
What you think they keep all this on VHS or DVD? LOL
Click to expand...
Did you read where I wrote digital or other wise? Even digital media take up space. every data storage facility has to purge older files to make room for more recent data. Large volume data storage is still stored on digital tape. It's cheaper and has higher volume than harddrives or optical media.



Sometimes when crimes are committed they are not recognized til long after the fact.
Click to expand...
Which is why data such as video is kept for a certain amount of time.
But it has to be purged. Surveilance video more so. even with compression video still takes up alot of media space.


What did I say to give that impression? I would expect them to still have ones from that morning though considering the significance of it. But here I go using critical thinking again to come to logical conclusions.
Click to expand...
I imagine that they would keep any video which had anything significant on it. video of people milling about a parkiing lot or evacuating building is not pertinate to the event. They have lept the guard house video.




Once a week they were picked up by Iron Mountain and taken to the Iron Mountain storage facility. Quite common for most bigger corporations here in Pittsburgh.
Click to expand...
Even Iron Mountain has to deal with practicality. They do not have infinite space. They even have storage and destruction plans.
http://www.ironmountain.com/solutions/business/retention/

Besides I think your company is more concerned with storing and protecting thier database and files rather than surveilance videos in the long term



So if someone flew a plane into your building at work the security cameras would capture it is what you sayin?
Click to expand...
Use your critical thinking. It would depend on where the cameras were located and where they were facing.

Why keep a video that has no pertinate information on it?



And all the video feeds from around the pentagon on 9/11 wouldn't have caught anything "unusual" now would they?
Click to expand...
Again, it depends on where the camera was located and what it was facing.

Oh BTW, where is that picture of the security camera that was facing the CITGO? You said you had it. Why not post it? Something wrong with posting the picture?
 
I dont see where Paik is pointing to a NOC flight path in this clip.

edwardpointseastlines.gif
 
TC329 said:
.....yeah over the Navy Annex to the NoC.

When does the plane fly over the Navy Annex in the official story?
Click to expand...

hee, hee, hee! Not even remotely close to the question you were asked TC!

We were talking about Morin, YOUR witness remember?

God, you guys are a joke.
 
Do I detect a little dissension in the CIT ranks by Dom?
Dom reacting to the statement of Aldo that they do not promote a fly over theory.
Aldo made the statement. He can clear it up.
Click to expand...
http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=65701&t=214463
So Dom what does Aldo have to "clear up"??
BTW Dom Aldo did us the word, "iwe".
In the context of his statement that would mean CIT.
Are you still part of CIT?
Do you support a fly over theory?
 
Bobert said:
Do I detect a little dissension in the CIT ranks by Dom?
Dom reacting to the statement of Aldo that they do not promote a fly over theory.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/single/?p=65701&t=214463
So Dom what does Aldo have to "clear up"??
BTW Dom Aldo did us the word, "iwe".
In the context of his statement that would mean CIT.
Are you still part of CIT?
Do you support a fly over theory?
Click to expand...

Well Dom Supports killtowns no plane theory and promoted it in a thread there and here. And Aldo has contempt for no planers having Craig unregister from Killtowns sandbox and remove KT threads from CITs playground. So looks like Dom is between a rock and a hard place?? I guess Aldo won't be adding a hip hop soundtrack to your big shanksville production after all Dom? Which is OK because we all know Hip Hop don't work out for the rural hills of Pa like it does when your driving up and down the urban environment of Colombia Pike and Washington Boulevard. THEN it sounds so friggin cool to the teens!! Right Dom??
 
Last edited:
To Tc's contention that security cameras would be recording to monitor the personell comings and goings to ensure they are not doing anything illegal
1) the entrance points have security pass checkpoints where one must swipe their security card and in some places PIN numbers. THESE are kept record of and thus there is a way to monitor who came in and out and when.
2) I fail to understand what exactly a video of a person coming and going would capture that would ensure that nothing illegal was being performed. If one were to take a hard copy of a docuement out then it will be in a pocket or breifcase and will not be visible to the camera.

The co. I work for has cameras only pointed at the vehicle yard to monitor for vandals. There are no cameras inside or on the entrances. There is a card swipe security pass.

To TC's asking about a path that includes the VDOT tower. There is a thread devoted to a path that would have the plane directly over the VDOT tower which shows that the math that Pft produced is markedly incorrect (for instance, IIRC, the calculation of distance in which the plane must halt its desent is instead the distance, vertically, that the plane will move if there is no attempt made at all to halt a desent) and that such a path is entirely possible for a 757. Regardless of that there is no way to know if the plane did pass directly over the tower or to one side of it.
I invite TC to use the search function to find this thread though I do believe that he may have posted to it himself.
If he continues, in this thread to deny that it has been done then I will do the search for him. TC, if you did post in that thread and now claim that such does not exist will you be incorrect, or lienig?
 
In the last few pages Tc has illustrated the falibility of human memory. None of the witnesses interviewed by the CIT saw a flyover and all of them who could see even a portion of the Pentagon state that the plane hit the building and none of them even believed it had hit an upper floor. The CIT claims they got this wrong, that it was a trick of their eyes and part of the design of the planners of this deception. There is also no record of any witness seeing a flyover. A few witnesses describe planes over the Pentagon none of which describe it as being very close to the building vertically. Certainly there are no witnesses at all that describe anything like the flyover that the CIT has made up.

Reheat has described the g's that a plane would experience and the bank angle required to make the turns that the CIT claim were made. So far the CIT has not come up with any flightpath that any plane could perform while also fitting the description of the craft that the interviewees all agree on(large,fast, low, little change in bank angle/no mention of very steep bank). Even with the help of pft there are still no calculations nor any possible flight path that the CIT has come up with that is both physically possible and fits the description of their interviewees.
 
On the surface, the security issue sounds prudent. The MDA sits atop a hill overlooking the Pentagon in a facility historically known as the Navy Annex. My office overlooked the side of the Pentagon that was struck by the airliner flown by the Sept. 11 terrorists. That jet flew over the Navy Annex before crashing into the Pentagon. While moving the MDA outside the Washington metro area may make sense, widely dispersing its employees does not.
http://www.space.com/spacenews/archive05/S...pEd_070505.html
Click to expand...


The Navy Annex Building on Columbia Pike in Arlington, Va., was the last sight some of the passengers on American Airlines Flight 77 saw before it sliced into the Pentagon on 11 September. With its landing gear down, the Boeing 757 flew so low that it shook the Annex and rattled windows. The Marines inside the Annex thought a freight train had passed overhead...It will never again be "business as usual" for Marines since Flight 77 flew over the Navy Annex Building on 11 September.
Click to expand...

Landing gear down?? who saw that??


I departed my desk at the Navy Annex three months prior to the September attack. In fact, United Airlines flight 77 roared over my former office at less than 100 feet before burrowing itself in the Pentagon.

http://www.usna.com/News_Pubs/Publications...eptMourning.htm
Click to expand...

So he wasn't actually there atthe time. Are we admitting heresay as evidence now?
 
Reheat said:
So, you want to defend your theory, do you? OK

In response to the above I issue the following challenge to "CIT" or their
representative.

A map of the flight path depicting ANY aircraft that reasonably meets YOUR witnesses descriptions flying a path from overhead Edward Paik's business to a position North of the Citgo Station and then directly to the impact point at the Pentagon.

Your diagram should include speed, headings, bank angles, G's (both lateral and vertical), estimated altitude and pull up point to overfly the Pentagon.

There should be no extraneous words, no spin, just a map including the above requested numbers.

The plausible of this will be evaluated by qualified pilots and engineers at JREF who will be the final judges on whether or not this challenge is met.

It's time to put up or shut up. Let's see the numbers proving your irrefutable "independent witness" testimony is physically possible.
Click to expand...
Where is TC? Have you helped Rob with his 11.2 G error? And now that you have zero real paths, what will you do with the non-paths?
 
The quality of the debunking in this thread is outstanding. Destroying the insane claims of a tiny group of fringe cranks is interesting and useful only to the restricted circle of skeptics who have immersed themselves in the particulars of 9/11 crackpottery. Showing how intelligent people with technical backgrounds address specific claims in their areas of expertise has universal value.

Reheat, you should really produce a paper on the "controversy" examined in this thread. It would be helpful to have the wealth of information contained in these pages organized properly in the manner of Mackey's paper on Griffin's errors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom