• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

CIT amping up the crazy – nastier witness attacks

Caustic Logic

Illuminator
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,494
With CIT “to ignore or not to ignore” has been the question. But I’ve just seen some insanity that sharpens the question. Since their flyover witness turned out to be simply toying with the boys, and their miraculous list of 13 NoC witnesses was achieved by including six copies of the same perspective error, the next step was clear: amp up the attacks on those witnesses who can’t even arguably fit their theory. Two cases are worthy of mention.

http://z3.invisionfree.com/CIT/index.php?showtopic=417
They’re preparing to release another video of “CIT's latest encounter” with Lloyd England, the elderly cab driver who was nearly killed when something smashed through his windshield right on the “official flight path.” I’ve kept somewhat quiet on their attacks against him, perhaps because it’s too obvious and oft-noticed – a leading edge persistent bad move. Aldo whines:

[...] we have also had to endure a campaign that has painted us as evil-doers who attacked a poor old man, accusing him of being a mass murderer involved in Pentagon attack when nothing could be further from the truth.

Orly? Please explain.

It is clear to us that he knows what he did and […] he is trying to confuse and cover up this incident while he slips in ambiguous references to how 'big' this operation was.

Oh, well that's... quite... different... from what the smear "campaign" said? This is getting spooky. Aldo is soliciting members at the gang’s forum for "thoughts on Lloyd England and his involvement in the Pentagon attack." This is the second half of the post, which you have to read to even glimpse the depths these loons are dangling over.

It will be clear to anyone who has been following this saga, and who has the attention span, that this man is not telling the truth.

When you watch this footage he may make you angry. We ask that you please view the entire presentation and think about the fact that the plane has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have flown on the north side of the Citgo. Again, the implications of this are far-reaching and land right at Lloyd's doorstep since he is the primary one who would have explaining to do.

I can assure you this will be the wildest ride yet in relation to our ongoing investigation. I am sure a lot of you may leave with some sort of sadness or anxiety after watching this presentation, because it will be clear to all who and what we are dealing with. In some sense, I have even felt sorry for Lloyd because it is clear to him and anyone watching, that he knows he is caught and is guilty. I am still in shock over what I watched and heard in these interviews.

I am looking for constructive discussion/feedback on how you feel about Lloyd and what type of light you think he should be portrayed in. I am also looking for solutions/suggestions on how we can get this man or his interviews and our evidence in front of gov't investigators. To be honest, at this point you would have all you need to march into your local representative's office and demand action.

Your participation is appreciated.

Get your Guy Fawkes masks ready, it's a-comin! Good thing they took it right to a legal laevel, it was starting to seem like they were hoping someone would demand answers in blood at Lloyd's literal doorstep. Just so we're clear, CIT has issued no such fatwa.

Madlene Zakhem, the suspicious south-path testifying Crypto-Jew (their characterization) is hashed over publicly again. Her “bizarre behavior” is finally enunciated – she had her arms crossed and seemed “stand-offish” in her interview, and later cut the lines of communication with the CIT. Oh man, this is sooo juicy… She cut them off right after this e-mail from August 6 2007:

I hope you remember us. We visited your office in August of 2006 with Russell Pickering and conducted an impromptu, unrecorded interview in front of the VDOT/STC where you claim you saw the plane fly over.

We returned after that debating and discussing the information we had obtained. Subsequently, we parted ways with Mr. Pickering.

Mr. Pickering is now publically stating that yourself and the late Mr. Christopher Landis said we were "creepy". This is clearly a problem if you did not say this, as it casts doubt on our integrity and credibility as researchers/filmakers.

Of course, Mr. Landis cannot speak for himself. […]

Cut-in for context: Christopher “Kit” Landis was another VDOT employee, who had given CIT the disc with high res Jason Ingersoll photos. They later noted “he wasn't able to give us specific answers” about the suspicious light poles, and “was notably nervous during our questions.” After this, “Christopher Landis committed suicide,” which they found “an extremely strange and suspicious twist that we can only pray is a coincidence,” but probably not, since it happened “about a week after we had obtained the CITGO witnesses testimony on film.” [source] So, a recently dead guy she knew, however well, is dragged into the conversation. Perhaps awkward... Luckily it was only in passing...

[…] But we feel it is appropriate that you shed some light on this matter as we feel that we treated both you and Mr. Landis fairly and with respect in the limited interactions that we had with you. In fact, we met with Mr. Landis for only a few minutes and said very little while waiting for the CD of photos he was burning for us.

Can you please explain what we did that was considered "creepy" or can you please clarify, for the record, what you told Russell Pickering that would cause him to arrive at this conclusion? Frankly, we believe he is making this up for his own reasons.

Thank you for your time and attention,

Aldo Marquis and Craig Ranke
Citizen Investigation Team

Her response could have been ‘what’s creepy? THAT? And YOU! And it’s getting worse!" But she was more calm, and stating in part:

You are in error and proceeding upon a false assumption. […] I decline your request and I assume that you will not pursue this frivolous claim any further. Any further writing would constitute an unfair burden on me. My desire is to "put these things to rest."”

Too little too late, lady. Aldo's brilliant mind summed up the questions thus:

Is Madlene merely an opportunist who wanted attention for what she claimed was a traumatic event? Was Madlene drastically mistaken? Unlikely. Or is Madlene an operative of some sort?

I have made comments about her jewish sounding last name and possible Israeli accent. Is there a possibility she is Mossad? Perhaps. But one thing is for sure. She certainly was not telling the truth about what she saw on 9/11.

I'm getting the feeling we may just see CIT's evidence in a coutroom someday - as an insanity plea defense.
 
Last edited:
Wow, the CIT are literally some of the most stupid, vile people in the entire world.
 
I was reading the Madlene Zakhem thread at the CIT site on the weekend, and was absolutely amazed at how low these characters will stoop to try promote their garbage.

I really hope that they get dragged into court for crimen injuria one day.
 
Wow, Crazy Craig and Fat Aldo spend all of their time (and the time of their coterie of mindless drones, including our old punching bag SD) attacking an old man, yet bizarrely cannot take the time to actually prove with supporting math that an airliner can fly any path described by any CIT witness:

My challenge to them, boys, calculate the flight path and resultant forces on an airliner descending over the annex, banking north of Citgo, descending below the level of the trees, and pulling out of the bank and the descent and up and over the impact site at the Pentagon.

Stop with your baseless and stupid attacks on witnesses, and prove that a plane could do what you claim it did.

Man, with attacks like this, it is no wonder that so many Truthers hate these thugs.
 
I am also looking for solutions/suggestions on how we can get this man or his interviews and our evidence in front of gov't investigators.

Have they really spent the last 7 years trying to figure out how to use email?
 
It's simple, really. If these witnesses are correct then CIT must be wrong, and that's not an option for them. Look at their entire philosophy and how they present themselves, their theories, and their witnesses. The one thing that's NEVER an option is "we got it wrong". Anything that disproves their crazy ideas is either said to be wrong (eyewitnesses), planted (physical evidence), or it is just plain ignored (physics).
 
My challenge to them, boys, calculate the flight path and resultant forces on an airliner descending over the annex, banking north of Citgo, descending below the level of the trees, and pulling out of the bank and the descent and up and over the impact site at the Pentagon.

I notice the CIT thugs have taken the time to comment that a fantasy "hockey stick" flight path (a strawman if I ever saw one) is: "Umm....it's an IMPOSSIBLE G maneuver for both examples, meaning all possible official scenarios."

So they know how to do the math, I guess, so lets stop with attacking old cab drivers, and provide the math, pronto.
 
Their flyover witness was screwing with them? When did that happen? That must have been solid gold.
 
Wow Aldo just makes garbage up as he goes along....
Not every witnesses is lying or mistaken. Witnesses deduce and I can guarantee you it is more llike a small handful that are directly lying about being witnesses. Remember, the CIA have agents are trained to lie and not question orders. If a superior told you we needed 9/11 to get into the oil fields because of peak oil or some other reason, because it means the survival of our country--you would lie. That is your job as an operative. If you have a hard time believing it. That is exactly the point of why they did it this way, because they no one would ever believe it. It is called the Big Lie technique.
 
Wow Aldo just makes garbage up as he goes along....


Don't know why exactly, but that gives off more of a "desparately trying to keep convincing myself I'm not wrong" groove than anything I've ever read by a twoofer before.
 
I would like to encourage the CIT boys to continue doing what they arer doing as long as possible. Eventually they will get to an age where they realize they have wasted their lives AND they will be too old to start any kind of new careers. I will then go out of my way to order pizza form which ever parlor they will end up working at.
 
Their flyover witness was screwing with them? When did that happen? That must have been solid gold.

http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2008/08/last-word-on-flyover-witness.html

Well that's my theory and opinion, of course. Others feel he must've seen the C-130, CIT thinks he's just confused, but he has the "second plane" looking a lot like 77 and approaching in a similar fashion, then turning hard hard left and U-turning to depart to the southwest, the same way it came in. The second half of the video is me drawing the flight path along with his words, check it.

And he's still their one "critical flyover witness." At the end of the video, note how they purposefully chased him off despite his massive importance. Implications... :rolleyes:

The scariest part of this new campaign for me is the emotional foreshadowing. They are trying to provoke some nutball fan of theirs to do something stupid.

When you watch this footage he may make you angry. [...] the implications of this are far-reaching and land right at Lloyd's doorstep [...] this will be the wildest ride yet [...] a lot of you may leave with some sort of sadness or anxiety after watching this presentation, because it will be clear to all who and what we are dealing with. [...] he knows he is caught and is guilty.

Seriously, when is the line crossed? Who can bring charges in a case like this if Lloyd doesn't want to for some reason? Isn't there a way to shut these things up?

Uh oh, now I'm in on the NWO campaign to shut them up... :jaw-dropp
that means they must be right! :boggled:
 
Last edited:
I don't ever want to see another CIT goon accuse JREF of "calling [CIT's] witnesses liars".
 
Last edited:
Aldo said:
I have made comments about her jewish sounding last name and possible Israeli accent. Is there a possibility she is Mossad?

Bwahahahahaaa.

Note to intelligence agencies: When placing assets in deep cover, please at least TRY to remember to change the last name and their accent.
 
It is too bad that Mr. England has not taken these morons to court for harassment.

TAM
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom